MOVIE RATING SCALE:

***** (Spectacular) 10

****1/2 (Excellent) 9

**** (Very Good) 8

***1/2 (Good) 7

*** (Above Average) 6

**1/2 (Average) 5

** (Below Average) 4

*1/2 (Mediocre) 3

* (Awful) 2

1/2 (Abysmal) 1

0 (Worthless) 0


Sunday, January 27, 2013

REVIEW UPDATE: Our 500th and Final Review...

Hello, folks...

Sorry for the delay in getting our last reviews posted. Busy, busy, busy. That leaves one last review - our 500th one. This was a recommend from a friend and is wonderful, wonderful film. Please see the poster and trailer below:

Partay?



Have a wonderful week, folks. Please expect the review for THE GOLDEN DOOR to post sometime this week, as time allows.

Ciao ciao....




# 499 - CROCODILE DUNDEE (1986)


CROCODILE DUNDEE (1985 - ROMANTIC COMEDY) **** out of *****

(Here comes the Country Mouse - and he's a goofy Aussie!)

Partay?

CAST: Paul Hogan, Linda Kozlowski, Mark Blum, David Gulpilil, Michael Lombard, John Meillon, Reginald Veljohnson.

DIRECTOR: Peter Faiman

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some seriously funny Fish out of his element - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: Last summer, I was out mountain biking with a friend we will call "Pretty Boy". Pretty Boy spent all of his early life in a smallish university town in the South, and prior to moving to the West Coast for work five years ago, had never been to a real city. You know: one with an actual skyline and multiple zip codes and crack dealers in certain neighborhood. This became quite apparent with the child-like enthusiasm and glee he would display when encountering such a remarkable and wondrous thing as... a light rail transit train. Or you average gargantuan shopping mall. Or a Barnes and Noble. "We don't have any of these where I come from!" he would exclaim like a kid let loose in a Toys R Us. And I swear to Jehosaphat nothing is sexier than a 30-year old guy who acts like kid let loose in a Toys R Us.

So one day, we are walking through the lobby of an office tower with a particularly long escalator rising up ahead of us, and Pretty Boy jumped on that thing like it literally was the Stairway To Heaven. While uttering his now-catchphrase: "We don't have any of these where I come from!" When we got to the top of the escalator, I turned to him and said, "Whenever I'm around you, I feel like Sue Charlton from CROCODILE DUNDEE." Needless to say, he didn't get the reference, so I had to force his hick ass to watch CROCODILE DUNDEE that night. Needless to say, he loved it. But then again, a 30-year old man who acts like a kid let loose in a Toys R Us will always love everything. Which is why I love him.

Anyhow, those of you who saw CROCODILE DUNDEE know that Sue Charlton (Linda Kozlowski) is the intensely driven American photojournalist from New York who travels to the outback of Australia to investigate the story of an Australian man who miraculously survived a brutal crocodile attack. He turns out to be a laid-back goofball named Mick "Crocodile" Dundee (Paul Hogan). Sue, the hard-charging NYC writer, fits in the outback the same way Pretty Boy fits in a city with at least one building with more than five floors in it: not at all. However, Sue, being a typical determined writer who also happens to be a major hottie, cajoles Mick to take her to the spot where he was attacked so she can take pictures for her newspaper. Mick, being a typical red-blooded male, says something along the chivalrous lines of "Fuck, YEAH!!!"

Before you know it, Mick is dragging Sue through the wilderness of the Australian outback - and generally making her realize why millions of people live in big cities: indoor plumbing, hot water, and easy access to Italian food. There's a reason why the Outback is empty, folks - it sucks to live there. And this is something our gal Sue learns pretty quickly. Fortunately, before all that heat can frizz her hair and fry her skin any more than it already has, they reach the spot where Mick was attacked by the fearsome croc. Sue takes pictures of it, then goes back to NYC to write her story and publish it in the papers.

The End.

Okay, not really. What really happens next is Mick lets it slip that he's never been to a big city, and Sue is immediately intrigued. You see, she grew up in the Big Apple, and knows no other home. Naturally, she thinks of Mick as a bizarre, but also highly attractive, freak of nature. Much like how I felt about Pretty Boy when I first met him and found out that he thought the Space Needle was just an urban legend. But I digress.... Anyhow, Sue, being a clever and resourceful writer who is also a major hottie, once again cajoles Mick to come to New York to not only see what a big city is really like, but also because it would be a nice twist to the story that she is writing about him. Mick, being the typical red-blooded male that he is, once again says, "Fuck YEAH!!!"

So the shoe goes on the other foot, and Mick follows Sue to New York which, let's face it, is probably more fucked-up than the Australian Outback could ever be. As you can imagine, a wide-eyed, innocent rube with an abundant sense of humor like Mick Dundee walking into the wilds of the Big Apple, is kind of like Ron Jeremy walking into a Bible Study session. In other words: wrong place, very wrong time. Sure enough, Mick is, yes, walking around like a 30-year old guy let loose in a Toys R Us. For starters, the following occur: (1) he sees a black (read: African-American) dude, and immediately asks the fella what "tribe" he belongs to; (2) he encounters a couple of hookers, and wonders what two pretty ladies are doing around the streets so late at night with so very little clothes on and so very much make-up plastered on their faces; (3) he crosses path with your average toilet bowl - and immediately thinks it's for cleaning his shoes; and last, but definitely the most fucked-up: (4) he encounters a couple of drag queens - and promptly cups their packages to confirm whether they are male or female. You gotta love a guy who cuts right to the chase.

Anyhow, while Mick is turning New York on its ear, Sue is busy writing her story about the Aussie Country Mouse Who Came To The Big Apple. Unfortunately, she is also falling in love with this simple dork called Mick Dundee. Which is really problematic, because she is involved with Walter (Mark Blum), her high-powered editor at the newspaper she works for. To make matters worse, Mark proposes to her, and she reluctantly accepts. Even though it is clear that she has fallen hard for our hero Mick. This is evidenced by the scene where Mick scares off some good old-fashioned NYC muggers by brandishing his trusty jungle bolo in their punk-ass faces. Right after, Sue turns to Mick and says "Why do I always feel like Jane from the Tarzan movies when I'm with you?" Girl, I feel your pain.

So... how will this end? Can a simple, rough-edged Country Mouse like Mick Dundee and a glamorous, intense City Mouse like Sue Charlton have a future together? What about Walter? Will Sue keep her word and marry him? Or will she follow her heart and choose Mick? Is Walter worth marrying anyway? And if Mick and Sue do end up together, who will relocate? Will Sue move to the Australian outback? Or will Mick move to NYC to wreak more havoc in the streets?

Whatever. Sue, let's gather up our boys and do a double-date, shall we?



BUT, SERIOUSLY: I remember when CROCODILE DUNDEE was first released way back in 1986. It was a small, fairly low-budget Australian film that most folks were expecting to do so-so business, at best. But that didn't happen. Instead, it exploded. The little film with "that Aussie guy from the commercials" whom most people had never heard about, suddenly took the United States and the rest of the world by storm - and far exceeded everyone's expectations.

When the final box-office receipts were tallied, CROCODILE DUNDEE was a bonafide international smash hit - and one of the highest-grossing films of 1986. And it all boils down to two things: (1) the simple, almost old-fashioned way in which the story unfolds, which was a refreshing change from the over-plotted and over-produced movies that were - and still are - the norm; and most importantly: (2) Paul Hogan's undeniable charisma and comedic talents - which cannot be overstated. The guy is wonderful.

CROCODILE DUNDEE is essentially a "Double Fish Out Of Water" story. First, Sue Charlton is out of her element as the big city photojournalist in the Australian outback. Then, later, when the story moves to New York City, it is Mick's turn to be the fish-out-of-water. Most of the film's comedic gold comes from this set-up. Watching Sue and Mick find their respective ways through the new worlds they find themselves in is indeed quite amusing. There are many classic moments here, mostly built around Mick's adventures (or misadventures) in the Big Apple. Pretty much all of Mick's encounters with the "locals" generates some serious laughter.

A lot this has to do with Mick's inherent simplicity and sweetness - and how hopelessly complex and bizarre New York and its inhabitants are in comparison. But the fact that he is a simple guy does not make him a simpleton. Mick has some real smarts, backbone, and conviction, and in combination with his boundless sense of fun and adventure, this becomes a killer combination. His is an intelligence that is pure and free of any artifice or pretension, and his humor is similarly open with the right mix of innocence and mischief. Put simply, he's a great character - and Paul Hogan nails his every line and scene. Hogan vividly shows us the striking combination of boy and man within Mick Dundee, and it is more than just a remarkable comic performance. It's a remarkable performance, period.

It's not hard to see why Sue Charlton would fall for Mick Dundee - and also, why Linda Kozlowski would fall for Paul Hogan. Kozlowski and Hogan met and fell in love during the filming of this movie - and they are still together to this day, over 27 years later. CROCODILE DUNDEE takes on an added layer of romance when you realize that, as you are watching these two characters fall in love, you are also watching the actors playing them also fall in love for real. Not hard to believe, considering Hogan and Kozlowski displays some real chemistry here.

Speaking of Sue Charlton and Linda Kozlowski, it's really these two who are at the heart of CROCODILE DUNDEE. Most people think that this movie is a comedy at its core - but it is really a love story. And it is not Mick's story - as many people think - but it is really Sue's. In essence, this is the tale of a sharp professional city girl who travels to the other side of the world, meets the last guy on Earth she thought she would ever fall for - and falls in love with him. And in doing so, she is forced to rethink what she wants out of life. Sue Charlton is one of my favorite film characters, and I love how Kozlowski plays her. In the hands of a less thoughtful and clever actress, Sue could have easily become a brittle and unpleasant bitch. However, Kozlowski doesn't just make Sue intense, outspoken, and determined - she also makes her funny, surprisingly laid-back, and almost shy and tentative at times.

Towards the end of the movie, there's a nice image of Sue in her office just staring absently at her computer screen as she struggles to write her story on Mick - whom she has fallen for by that point - and Walter comes up behind her and catches her off-guard. It's a great non-verbal scene that effectively sets up Sue's dilemma - does she choose the guy that polite society says she should marry - or does she choose the guy she really loves? And of course, this movie has one of my favorite finales of all time: Sue running through the streets of New York to keep Mick from leaving and catching up to him on a very crowded subway platform where she... well, you'll see. It's this combo of hard and soft tones that really make the character of Sue Charlton sing. Just as you have to understand why Sue would fall for Mick, you have to also understand why Mick would fall for Sue. And with Linda Kozlowski's nicely nuanced and subtle performance, we understand why.

After the success of CROCODILE DUNDEE 2 in 1988, Hogan and Kozlowski never really managed to recreate the box office bonanza of their first two movies together. Nevertheless, they are still happily married today - over 27 years after first meeting each other. As far as I'm concerned, that is the real success. And we dedicate this review to them. Hope you have many more years together, Mick and Sue...

... and to Pretty Boy. : )



# 498 - THE STEPFORD WIVES (1975)


THE STEPFORD WIVES (1975 - MYSTERY / THRILLER / SATIRE) ****1/2 out of *****

(Don't let any of these bitches into my neighborhood...)

Partay?

CAST: Katharine Ross, Paula Prentiss, Peter Masterson, Patrick O'Neal, Tina Louise, Nanette Newman.

DIRECTOR: Bryan Forbes

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some seriously scary homemakers - straight ahead...




IT'S LIKE THIS: My favorite TV series when I was growing up was CHARLIE'S ANGELS. The show ran from 1976-1981, and I started watching it as a tiny tot - and was hooked. There was just something about three hot chicks who were also smart, resourceful, and gutsy who did things that were normally only reserved for men during that time period, that just reeled me in. In fact, the best gift anyone ever gave me was all five seasons of CHARLIES'S ANGELS on DVD. I was so happy I literally I pissed myself.

Unfortunately, when I was a kid, CHARLIE'S ANGELS ran every Sunday night in the Southeast Asian nation I grew up in, and this led to some, er, conflicts with Mom. As in: her yelling at me to get my ass to bed because "you're not going to be late one more time for your kindergarten class!" And me yelling back for her to leave me the hell alone or I was going to tell the neighbors how much she really weighs. Or something like that. You have not lived until you've seen a five-year-old threaten an adult with the intensity of Don Corleone about to order a hit - let alone towards his mother.

Finally, I had to have my dad broker a deal with Mommy Dearest to let me stay up an hour later to watch my "girls." Poor Dad was probably proud because of what he thought was me exhibiting an early interest in the "ladies." I was interested, alright. In their clothes and hair styles. And in their handbags. Bottom line: I didn't want to fuck Jaclyn Smith or Kate Jackson - I wanted to be them. Let's just say you also haven't lived until you've seen a kindergartener put the judo-chop Kung-fu moves on his classmates while at the same time yelling "watch my hair, you goon!" Sorry, pops. Thanks for going to bat for me, though.

At any rate, it is interesting to note that while CHARLIE'S ANGELS is my favorite TV show from the 70s, one of my favorite films from the 70s is THE STEPFORD WIVES. I have had friends and acquaintances do a double take upon hearing this. I guess it has to do with the fact that CHARLIE'S ANGELS dared to create a TV show centered around three strong women stepping out of traditional feminine roles during a time when men were taking center stage, while THE STEPFORD WIVES is a thriller that revolved around what happens in a small town where the women are forced to remain passive and conform in those traditional feminine roles. Some people think these shows are as different as night and day. Really, though, they are like Sisters-In-Arms, but THE STEPFORD WIVES is just a darker and more oblique examination of women's lib, male oppression, and female empowerment.

But we'll save that shit for the BUT SERIOUSLY portion of this review. For now, let's discuss the plot of THE STEPFORD WIVES. Our heroine is Joanna Eberhard (Katharine Ross). She is married to Walter Eberhard (Peter Masterson), a Manhattan lawyer who is more focused on making partner than his family. Nevertheless, he decides to move them (and their two kids) to the quaint suburb of, erm, Stepford in nearby Connecticut because it's a better place to raise a family. And, on the surface, it looks like Stepford is indeed a cozy, homey, safe place.

Before long, though, Joanna starts to get a little creeped out by the place. Primarily because the place is a little too picture-perfect. Everything is in order and just as it should be - especially the women. You see, the housewives of Stepford, Connecticut are the textbook definition of "homemakers." All these bitches do are: (1) cook, (2) clean, and (3) talk endlessly and incessantly about cooking and cleaning. Seriously. They don't hang out. They don't go bowling. They don't drool over the milkman or gardener. They don't go to male strip clubs on a Girls Nite Out. They just sit around and get all orgasmic about the new dishwashing detergent and recipe for Mocha Brownies in the latest issue of "Good Housekeeping". Really.

Now, let's examine Joanna. She is not the perfect homemaker. Her house is a little cluttered, but it is not messy. She is a good mother, but knows when to chill out and let her kids get away with shit. She is a good cook, but she doesn't spend her days pouring over cookbooks or magazines. She has other interests beyond cooking and cleaning: she is also an avid photographer and hopes to show her work in a gallery soon. In other words, she's your average housewife. However, in comparison to the rest of the wives of Stepford, she is an alien. Mainly because she, you know, has a fucking life beyond keeping her floors and kitchen counters spotless. You see, in Stepford, the norm for housekeeping is perfection. Which is bad news for Joanna.

Actually, it's bad news for Joanna and her two pals, Bobby Markowe (Paula Prentiss) and Charmaine Wimperis (Tina Louise). Bobby is your typical loud-mouthed firecracker, while Charmaine is your typical sexpot. Bobby could barely give a flying fuck about keeping her house spotless and it always looks like a hurricane hit it, while Charmaine has an uptight German housekeeper to do that pesky cleaning for her. So, much like our trio of heroines in CHARLIE'S ANGELS, Joanna, Bobby, and Charmaine hang out together and behave like normal women. It's not a complete surprise that they end up becoming outcasts to the perfect women of Stepford, who spend all their spare time baking and cooking and scrubbing floors like they are the stars of a commercial for Mr. Clean or Pine-Sol. And Joanna and her pals are just fine with this.

Until Charmaine suddenly… changes. One day, she fires her housekeeper and starts cleaning her whole house herself. Considering that Charmaine used to prefer eating mud over cleaning her house herself, this is a bit perplexing. Now, she acts like the task of scrubbing her floors and perfecting a Lemon Pie is the most fucking important thing in the world – when before she couldn’t give a rat’s ass. Which, frankly, kind of concerns Joanna and Bobby because their friend Charmaine is... no longer their friend Charmaine.

It doesn't help that Joanna and Bobby also find out that the women of Stepford all used to hold power positions and jobs. One used to be a judge. Another was a CEO. Another was a political activist. Then, one by one, they all quit their jobs and decided to become... Betty Crocker. And now that Charmaine has also changed, Bobby and Joanna are getting seriously concerned that something is going on in the seemingly peaceful town of Stepford. Something is happening to its women. Something really, really, really fucked-up.

Then, one day, Joanna goes over to visit Bobby and discovers the most horrifying thing ever in the history of Human Civilization has happened: Bobby's house is spotless and clean - and Bobby herself is walking around her now-sparkling kitchen all coiffed-up like a white Aunt Jemima. In other words: "Hooooooooooly Fucking Shit." In even other words: the only "normal" woman left in Stepford is.... Joanna Eberhard. Uh-oh...

So... what the actual fuck is happening to the women of Stepford? Why are they one-by-one transforming into "The Perfect Housewife"? Why did they all end their lucrative careers to become stay-at-home hausfraus? Is it just a coincidence? Or is it something more sinister? Is it something in the water? Or something else? Are the men and husbands of Stepford somehow involved? And now that Charmaine and Bobby have "changed" and joined the ranks of the The Stepford Wives - is Joanna next?

Run, Joanna. Run.


BUT, SERIOUSLY: One of my favorite novelists is Ira Levin. Levin specializes in thrillers that place ordinary protagonists in increasingly terrifying scenarios and seemingly benign environments that gradually grow threatening. His novels have invariably been turned into films. Some of these movies have been classics (ROSEMARY'S BABY, THE STEPFORD WIVES), some have been strong near-classics (A KISS BEFORE DYING 1956, THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL), and some have been flawed misfires (A KISS BEFORE DYING 1991, SLIVER). However, no matter where they sit on the continuum of classic, near-classic, or misfire, these film adaptations of Levin's books have all shared one common trait: they are all interesting. And one of the most interesting is THE STEPFORD WIVES.

In the opening, we juxtaposed THE STEPFORD WIVES with the 1970s TV show, CHARLIE'S ANGELS. On the surface, these two seem very different. THE STEPFORD WIVES showed women being victimized by the men of a wealthy suburb and transformed into robotic homemakers. CHARLIE'S ANGELS showed empowered women breaking the victim stereotype and fighting for themselves. However, under their disparate surfaces, they both are about female empowerment and the struggles of women in the 1970s to be seen as equals to their male counterparts. THE STEPFORD WIVES just takes a more subtle approach that is ultimately more damning of male oppression. Anyone who sees THE STEPFORD WIVES as Anti-Woman is being very short-sighted and missing the point. It is, in fact, one of the most Pro-Woman films out there.

What's so great about THE STEPFORD WIVES is how it conceals its very trenchant observations on male-female politics, women's liberation, and male authoritarian figures underneath a very taut and suspenseful thriller package. Joanna Eberhard is your classic Ira Levin thriller heroine. Much like Rosemary Woodhouse (Mia Farrow) in ROSEMARY'S BABY and Carly Norris (Sharon Stone) in SLIVER, she is an ordinary woman who moves into a new environment that seems perfect and peaceful - but gradually becomes more and more eerie and sinister, until she realizes that is in mortal danger. For Rosemary, this environment is the gothic and maze-like NYC apartment house that turned out to be filled with black magic-practicing witches. For Carly, it was the sleek "sliver" high-rise that turned out to have a history of mysterious deaths and an elaborate electronic surveillance system that kept tabs on everyone in the building. And for Joanna, it is the small, exclusive Connecticut suburb of Stepford that seems like the perfect place to live - until she gradually realizes that the perfect exterior of the place conceals a very dark secret.

Director Bryan Forbes does a terrific job of gradually turning up the heat. The problem with many thrillers these days is how quickly they yank up the temperature and rush the proceedings. Alfred Hitchcock, the Grand Master of the Suspense Thriller, understood that a thriller is most effective when you first take the time to establish the normalcy of the protagonist's world - then take it apart piece by piece. Modern "thrillers" are so focused on unleashing the thrills and suspense as soon as possible, that we never get a chance to properly the characters and the world they live in. The result: we are not concerned for their welfare or survival. Witness the awful remake of THE STEPFORD WIVES in 2005 with Nicole Kidman - which was presented as a misguided comedy. Or better yet, don't witness it. See the original instead.

Katharine Ross, Paul Prentiss, and Tina Louise are all terrific as Joanna, Bobby, and Charmaine - the last three women of Stepford who are still human. The reason their eventual downfall and conversion to the dark side is so scary to watch, is because the movie has taken the time to sketch and flesh out their friendship. Joanna is the level-headed one, Bobby is the crazy funny one, and Charmaine is the sexy glamorous one - and Ross, Prentiss, and Louise make these women all very vivid, sympathetic, and sisterly. And when they start "changing", one-by-one, it is not only scary. It is also heartbreaking. Especially at the very end, when Joanna finally discovers the "secret" of the men of Stepford - and the reason behind the odd behavior of the Stepford wives. The final shot of the film is, quite frankly, terrifying. But this is the only way this kind of thriller could end effectively. One of the reasons the remake was so terrible is because of its tacked-on "happy ending" that felt thoroughly false.

Peter Masterson, Patrick O'Neal, Nanette Newman, and a very young Mary Stuart Masterson (Peter daughter in this film and real life) are all stellar in important supporting roles. But this film belongs to its three female leads. Katharine Ross, Paula Prentiss, and Tina Louise are the true gems of this film - and much like the trio of heroines in the CHARLIES'S ANGELS TV show, they generate an emotional center and strong rooting interest that makes the audience concerned as to their eventual fates. And that is the mark of a classic thriller.

So... what is the secret of Stepford? What is changing the women into the "The Perfect Housewives"? Found out for yourselves... But don't say we didn't warn you.



# 497 - NEVER LET ME GO (2009)


NEVER LET ME GO (2009 - DRAMA / ROMANCE) **** out of *****

(the Happy Police have their work cut out for them here...)

Partay?

CAST: Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley, Andrew Garfield, Sally Hawkins, Charlotte Rampling, Ella Purnell, Charlie Rowe.

DIRECTOR: Mark Romanek

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some thoroughly depressing plot developments straight ahead.




IT'S LIKE THIS: Hello, folks... Today, I have a riddle for you. How is it possible to for you to like a film that stars one of your favorite actors, is well-written and well-acted, tackles a profound and relevant subject matter that makes you think, has a terrific supporting cast, has a beautiful musical score, is based on highly-praised novel, and is a film that you like very much - but still you avoid watching it as much as possible? How can that be?

Our next review is NEVER LET ME GO, an adaptation of Kazuo Ishiguro's widely-acclaimed novel of the same title. It stars Andrew Garfield, one of my TOP 3 favorite actors. It is very well-written and well-acted (obviously, with Garfield in the lead). It tackles a profound and relevant subject matter that makes you think. Has a terrific supporting cast in the forms of Carey Mulligan, Keira Knightley, Sally Hawkins, and Charlotte Rampling. It has a hauntingly moving musical score composed by Rachel Portman. And it is a film that I like very much. So why then do I come up with a dozen and one excuses to avoid watching it?

The answer is simple: the movie is depressing as hell. Trust me - if you ever needed a film to bring you down - hard - from a Sappy Romantic Comedy-induced sugar high, NEVER LET ME GO is it. This is not a movie that screams "Fun! Fun! Fun!" More like: "Hara-Kiri! Hara-Kiri! Hara-Kiri!" You see, this flick is about an alternate future in which human cloning is as commonplace as Facebook accounts and I-Phones. It seems the primary use of human cloning is to have "back-up bodies" to harvest organs from when the original human gets sick. In other words, the clones are basically a collection of "spare parts" to be used when needed. Which means the clones don't really have much of a life. They are sequestered from the rest of society in "homes" deep in the countryside. And with all the inevitable organ harvesting, they also don't live long. All in all, it sucks to be a clone.

Naturally, our heroes in NEVER LET ME GO are clones. They are: (1) Tommy (Andrew Garfield), doe-eyed hottie who is friends with (2) Ruth (Keira Knightley), slutty tramp who is friends with (3) Cathy (Carey Mulligan), shy gal who secretly loves Tommy. Tommy, Cathy, and Ruth have grown up in Hailsham, which is one of those "homes" I talked about before. Picture an orphanage - but much, much, much more fucked-up. Basically, the kids at Hailsham don't have adoption to look forward to. More like losing their organs, one by one, until they "complete." Which is basically a new-fangled way to say "dying." I told you it was a depressing movie.

Anyhow, Cathy eventually becomes a "carer": someone who helps fellow donors through the process and makes things easier for them. But if you think that taking this special duty exempts Cathy from donating herself, you are sorely mistaken, my friend. Basically, it just buys her a little time - until she starts donating herself. See? This movie is beyond fucked-up. The fact that these terrible things are happening to hotties who look exactly like Andrew Garfield, Carey Mulligan, and Keira Knightley makes it even more wrong. Why, God, why!?!?! These asses are too fine to be killed off.

As if things weren't complicated enough, a love triangle develops between our heroes. Cathy has always loved Tommy, but hides it like it's the Lost Treasure of the Sierra Madre. Plus, Ruth really likes Tommy, so Cathy does what any decent friend would do: graciously stand aside to let Ruth and Tommy be together - and resign herself to masturbating while imagining what Tommy looks like buck naked. Okay, okay, Cathy doesn't actually do that last part. But, come on, if she can't fuck him, what else is she supposed to do? Ahem?

At any rate, while Ruth and Tommy are shagging the shit out of each other, Cathy busies herself with her "carer" duties. And let me just tell you that it is not a pretty walk on a Sunday afternoon. Apparently, a "carer" is like a cross between a psychologist, a nurse, and a stalker. I mean, damn, if I had to give up my organs one-by-one, will someone following me around and asking me if I'm alright over and over again, make any real goddamned difference? Don't think so.

Soon, however, Ruth begins to feel guilty for having stood in the way of Tommy and Cathy - and tries to make amends. Of course, the fact that the bitch has donated, like, three organs already and is on the verge of "completing" - AKA croaking like a fish in the desert - might have something to do with her sudden contriteness. Ruth encourages Tommy and Cathy to try to find out about that "special clause" that allows donors to live as man and wife together for a few years - before the inevitable donations begin. Ruth knows that Tommy and Cathy love each other and thinks they should plead their case.

But is there really such a clause? Or is it just another legend invented to keep the donors in line? And what about the three donations that Tommy has already made? Is it too late for him to finally have a relationship with Cathy? And what about Cathy? How long can she continue to be a "carer" before she must begin her own donations? Can Tommy and Cathy possibly have a happy ending this late in the game?

Now do you see why I hate watching this movie?


BUT, SERIOUSLY: In the opening, we talked about how some movies can be well-made, well-acted, and well-written, but still be less than pleasant experiences - due to the simple fact that they are heartbreaking. An example for me would BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, which is a bold, powerful love story about the forbidden love between two men - but is a movie that I have only watched twice because of how sad it is. While I like BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN and agree it is a very good movie, it is not one of my favorites. NEVER LET ME GO is another such film: everything about is top-notch, but I don't look forward to watching it. I have seen more NEVER LET ME GO than I have BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, and find it more bearable, but it is due mainly to the unique screen presence of Andrew Garfield, as well as Carey Mulligan's ethereal charisma.

Contrast NEVER LET ME GO with BOY A, my # 1 favorite movie of all time, which also stars Andrew Garfield in a similarly heartbreaking performance. BOY A also has the same bleak tone and downbeat ending that NEVER LET ME GO. However, the reason BOY A has the distinction of being my # 1 favorite film, while NEVER LET ME GO - despite being a quality film - doesn't even place in my TOP 20, is because BOY A has a hopeful tone and moments of joy. These moments are so visceral and vivid, courtesy of the endlessly-talented Garfield's empathic ability to make you feel what he is feeling, that you feel you are walking in Jack Burridge's (Garfield's character in BOY A) shoes. Even when things turn very dark in the end, these moments of joy and hope linger and redeem the film.

NEVER LET ME GO, on the other hand, is continually somber and brooding, with very little moments of light to punctuate the unrelenting gloom. Eventually, the film reaches its heartbreaking ending, and it feels like a heavy weight has been dropped on your shoulders - rather than taken off it. BOY A had a similarly dark and devastating ending, but due to Garfield's powerhouse performance (he won the British Oscar Award for it) and the aforementioned threads of hope in the film, it was a more haunting experience. Bottom line: I have no problem watching BOY A over and over again, even if it is sometimes a painful experience. NEVER LET ME GO, on the other hand, is another story. It is just not an experience I want to go through another time.

That's not to say it is bad film. Far from it. NEVER LET ME GO is based on Kazuo Ishiguro's celebrated novel of the same name. I have not read it, but I am told that it has a surreal, lyrical feel. You can see elements of this in the film here and there, and it works well for the film. In the end, though, the film's relentlessly sad and bleak tone kind of weighs it down. Of course, another likely reason that the film is so hard to watch is also because we care about the characters so much. Garfield, Mulligan, and Keira Knightley do excellent jobs of fleshing out their roles - which are basically innocents who are not long to this world.

Garfield, as always, acts with his eloquent brown eyes and lean physique - reminding us that playing a character is not just about dialogue. It is just as much about was is left unsaid - or said through expression, movement, and gesture. Garfield makes Tommy's gentle nature endearing - and later when his hopes are dashed in a crucial scene towards the end, Garfield also shows the volcanic emotions that have been buried for so long. While he doesn't have the same powerhouse showcase that BOY A gave him (mainly because he has to share center stage with two other leads) this is still a very strong performance that deserves a high place in his body of work.

Ever since her attention-getting role in AN EDUCATION, Mulligan has always registered as someone who is poised and mature beyond her years. Her deep, rich voice has a way of contradicting her fresh-faced features, making her an interesting paradox. This dichotomy is what makes her perfect for the role of Cathy - a young person who has been forced to grow up and take responsibility for those around her. Time after time, Cathy takes the gracious route, from nobly stepping aside to let Ruth get together with Tommy (even though Cathy loves Tommy herself), to taking on the duties of a "carer" to make her life easier for her fellow donors. And when Tommy and Cathy finally manage to get together at long last for a brief period of time at the end of the film, it is a small ray of light through all the darkness. Cathy is my second favorite character in the film, and Mulligan plays her with understated grace.

Knightley has more atypical role - for her, anyway. We have gotten used to seeing Knightley playing the sweet but feisty lead in films like BEND IT LIKE BECKHAM and PRIDE AND PREJUDICE that it comes as somewhat of a surprise to see her play someone as unpleasant as Ruth. Knightley shows her range by playing not only Ruth's selfishness, but also her guilt and contrite desire to make things right for Tommy and Cathy at the end for having stood in their way for so long. Kudos must be given to Knightley for stepping out of her comfort zone by taking on this part that require more from her than to smile and be likable - and doing it well.

Charlotte Rampling and Sally Hawkins are just as accomplished as the three leads. Rampling's icily aloof beauty has not dimmed as she has aged, and she is perfect for the role of the Miss Emily, headmistress of Hailsham, who seems a bit of a mysterious wild card. Is she sympathetic to the donors? Or could she care less if they are all destined to die young? Rampling never allows her character to be read accurately by anyone around her, allowing only small glimpses of softness here and there, which makes her so fascinating. Hawkins, on the other hand, is completely transparent and winning as Miss Lucy, a teacher deeply sympathetic to the plight of her students, but know there is nothing she can do about it. She ably expresses Miss Lucy's conflicted emotions about her wards and their fate - and the film's second best scene (the first best scene is Tommy's emotional meltdown at the end) is when Miss Lucy slowly realizes that the staff of Hailsham have been lying to the students about their purpose in life and withholding the truth from them. Miss Lucy does the painful right thing by telling them everything in a scene that Hawkins plays with exquisite grace and barely-contained emotion. Miss Lucy's role is small but she is my favorite character in the film - and Sally Hawkins makes her mark with it.

Someone said to me that a good film entertains - while a very good film makes you think. We have rated NEVER LET ME GO with **** (very good), and it is because it does make you think. It makes you appreciate that you can choose how to live your life, what to do with it, and who to love. And that is a gift. One that the boys and girls of Hailsham will never have. And while NEVER LET ME GO may not be an easy film to watch over and over again, it is most definitely a very good movie that makes you think.

Sunday, January 6, 2013

# 496 - THE ENGLISH PATIENT (1996)


THE ENGLISH PATIENT (1996 - ROMANCE / DRAMA / MYSTERY) ***** out of *****

(Never underestimate the power of love and memory...)

Partay?

CAST: Ralph Fiennes, Juliette Binoche, Willem Dafoe, Kristin Scott Thomas, Naveen Andrews, Colin Firth, Frank Whatley, Clive Merrison, Nino Castelnuovo.

DIRECTOR: Anthony Minghella

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some star-crossed love among Italian villas and sandswept deserts - straight ahead...





IT'S LIKE THIS: Remember Frances Mayes (Diane Lane), the heroine of one our very first reviews, UNDER THE TUSCAN SUN (review # 4)? Remember how she was traveling through the lovely Tuscany region of Italy? Remember how she was charmed by a rundown but lovely Italian villa called Bramasole - and impulsively decided to buy it and live in Bella Italia permanently? Well, Fran has a lot in common with the heroine of our latest review. She is the even lovelier Hannah (played by the Queen of Lovely herself: Juliette Binoche). And the movie is the exquisitely rendered THE ENGLISH PATIENT. The only difference is that Hannah's villa is a lot more rundown than Fran's - and Hannah stays behind in her villa to care for a dying, ahem, "English patient."

Hannah is a Canadian nurse working with the Allies in Italy at the end of World War II. The war hasn't exactly been kind to her. First, she lost her Canadian officer fiancee in battle. Not long after that, she had to watch as her best friend and fellow nurse, Jan, got blown to bits by a land mine left behind by the bloody Krauts. Shell-shocked and grieving, Hannah notices the crumbling Tuscan villa called Villa San Girolamo when they pass by it - and decides to stay there until her “English” patient croaks. "It makes no sense to keep moving him!" she tells her commander. She says she will care for the mysterious man at San Girolamo until he dies - then catch up with the troops in the Northern Italian city of Livorno. But I wouldn't be surprised if Hannah didn't just want some privacy after spending so much time in close quarters with a bunch of hot, sweaty soldiers. Think about it: her own huge villa all to herself - and she has only one roommate: the, ahem, “English” patient.

Anyhow, Hannah and the “English” patient pass the time at the isolated villa talking and telling stories to each other. Pretty soon, we're seeing the “English” patient flashing back to his life before his accident: a plane crash that left him severely burned and disfigured. Apparently, a few years ago, he was the hot and sexy Hungarian map-maker, Count Laszlo Almasy - and looked a hell of a lot like Ralph Fiennes (hence the hot and sexy part). Almasy was stationed in the deserts of Africa, where everything was well until a woman crossed his path. She was Katharine Clifton, and because she looks a hell of a lot like Kristin Scott Thomas, she's pretty hot and sexy herself. Before you know it, Almasy and Katharine are boinking each other's pelvises in an illicit affair so hot and steamy, it might qualify as a weather phenomenon. All this is problematic, though, because Katharine is married to Jeffrey (Colin Firth), a pilot who is head over heels over her. Uh-oh...

Meanwhile, back in the present (if you can call it that), Hannah meets a mysterious Canadian traveler named David Caravaggio (Willem Dafoe) - who shows up unexpectedly at the villa, bearing eggs (don't ask). Thinking Hannah and the “English” patient need some company, he asks to stay at the villa. After some hemming and hawing, Hannah agrees. However, it seems that Caravaggio has a hidden agenda, and it has a lot to do with... the “English” patient. Then, just to make things more interesting, an Indian mine-sweeper named Kip (Naveen Andrews) shows up at the villa to make sure all land mines are detected and deactivated. Let's just say that pretty soon Kip and Hannah are giving each other major googley-eyes...

Speaking of googley eyes, that's exactly what Almasy and Katharine are giving each other in the past. Actually, that's not 100% accurate, because they're actually giving each other more than that: imagine every imaginable sex move under the sun, and that pretty much completes the package. By comparison, googley eyes between Kip and Hannah are downright chaste. Unfortunately, Jeffrey cottons on to the fact that Katharine is doing the "Rumpy-Pumpy" with Almasy - and so begins the countdown to an utterly fucked-up confrontation in the middle of the desert. One word: ouch.

So... how badly will Almasy and Katharine's affair end? And how will things turn out between Hannah and Kip? Will she lose him to an explosion just like Jan and her fiancee? What other secrets is the “English” patient hiding? How will these mysteries affect Hannah? Is Caravaggio right when he says Hannah is in love with her patient? Or is it Kip that she loves? And how does Caravaggio's past tie in to the English patient's? How will all these various threads tie in together? What is the ultimate mystery of the “English” patient?

Find out for yourself. Just don't blame me if you fall head over heels for Juliette Binoche in the process...


BUT, SERIOUSLY: One of the funniest episodes of Seinfeld is the one where Elaine (Julia Louis-Dreyfus) goes to see THE ENGLISH PATIENT with her date - only to be driven made by how "boring" it was. Obviously, THE ENGLISH PATIENT is a stellar film. It received many perfect ratings from many critics and landed on many of the “TOP 10 MOVIES OF 1996” lists. It also won a slew of Academy Awards, chief among them the Best Supporting Actress honor for Juliette Binoche for her beautiful portrayal of Hannah, the emotionally wounded but resilient nurse who unravels the mystery of Count Laszlo Almasy, the "English" patient. In short, it is a wonderful, breathtaking film that is far from boring.

So why, then, the Seinfeld episode and Elaine's "boredom"? That is simple: THE ENGLISH PATIENT is not a simple film. Unlike many films, it unfolds in a dream-like, languorous way that is not rushed. It slowly fills in the pieces of what starts out a complex and striking mosaic that ultimately turns out to be pretty simple, while trusting the audience to keep up as the story comes together. It puts its faith in the intelligence of the audience - and in the belief that they will pay attention and thereby allow themselves to be drawn into the sensual folds of the tale. Needless to say, many mainstream movie-goers will not have the attention spans necessary for this film, and Elaine's character is clearly one of them. THE ENGLISH PATIENT is a film for adults - not the restless and immature.

The complex tapestry of THE ENGLISH PATIENT is anchored by three main stories - all romances. First, there is the forbidden affair between Laszlo Almasy and the married Katharine Clifton, and – second – we have the tentative romance between Hannah and Kip. One relationship takes place in the past, the other unfolds in the present. However, both mirror one another and are linked by the third romance - which is the platonic connection between Almasy (now the "English" patient) and Hannah as his caregiver. As Hannah pieces together Almasy's past based on his clues from his scrapbook, the past and present converge. David Caravaggio's appearance as an "avenger" adds further intrigue to the tapestry. Director/writer Anthony Minghella, adapting from Michael Ondaatje's surreal and hypnotic novel, does a fantastic job of weaving these various threads into a striking pattern.

The thing is, despite THE ENGLISH PATIENT's initial impression as a very complex tapestry, it really revolves around a fairly simple notion: that love can move mountains and reach forward and backwards through time. The two poster taglines used for the marketing of THE ENGLISH PATIENT are simple one-liners that echo the true nature of the film: (1) "In Love, There Are No Boundaries"; and (2) "In Memory, Love Lives On." Throughout the movie, the various lead characters dance in and out of each other’s orbits as they clumsily try to make their way to each other. The pleasure of this film lies not only in seeing these characters become one, but also in watching how they get there - and how they change and remove their boundaries to let the other one in. It's not always graceful or pretty, as real life can attest, but that's all the better because their "dances" have the ring of truth.

Another lovely theme that runs through THE ENGLISH PATIENT is that of gift-giving as a form of human connection. Almasy, Katharine, Hannah, Kip, and Caravaggio use gifts as ways to bridge the gaps between them. Katharine shyly gives Almasy some drawings to paste into his scrapbook, which he first turns down - not out of ungraciousness, but more for fear of letting her close to him. Later, he realizes his mistake and touchingly accepts her gift. Then, later, he buys her a simple thimble at a Cairo market - and in a heartbreaking scene much later in the film, discovers her wearing it at a crucial moment. Then there's the cup of olive oil that Hannah shyly gives to Kip to wash his hair with - and the awkward but lovely moment where they just stare at each other afterwards. Later, Kip returns the favor by taking Hannah on a midnight excursion to a local chapel with beautiful murals illuminated by a torchlight. It's the loveliest scene in this film - and one of my favorite scenes in any film, ever. Then there is Caravaggio's gift of eggs to Hannah when he first arrives at the Villa San Girolamo. Essentially, the act of giving gifts changes and alters these characters' boundaries, as circumstances bring them closer and closer together. This proves that, as the poster tagline states, in love there are no boundaries.

The second marketing tagline is "In Memory, Love Lives On." This is most germane to the central storyline of Almasy and Katharine. She continues to live on his memory, despite her (SPOILER alert!) tragic death. The words and images she created for him live on in his journal. The same goes for Hannah, who fears that she is cursed because every person who loves her and whom she loves, ends up dying – and she now fears the same thing will happen to Kip because he loves her. Indeed, her pivotal decision to stay behind in the abandoned Villa San Girolamo and care for Almasy, also seems to come from a refusal to remember those she has lost (her fiancee and then her best friend) for fear of hurting even more - and a determination to keep everyone else in the world out. However, the arrival of Kip and Caravaggio into her cloistered space forces her (and Almasy) to remember and engage the living once again. Also, later in the film when Kip loses his beloved boss to a land mine, Hannah realizes that loss is universal - and that everyone loses something. It becomes her turn to comfort someone else. She also realizes that remembering is part of moving on.

Speaking of Hannah, it's quite interesting to note that the wonderful actress who plays her, Juliette Binoche, was nominated for Best Supporting Actress (which she won) in 1996 - and not Best Actress. In the novel and the film, Hannah is clearly the heroine. Yet, the Hollywood publicity machine trumpeted Katharine Clifton as the heroine, likely because it is a more "glamorous" role - and because Katharine is the true love interest in the story. Kristin Scott Thomas is terrific as Katharine, and her performance is just as interesting and flawless as Binoche's portrayal of Hannah - but I would have much preferred if Hannah would have been rightfully seen as the heroine of THE ENGLISH PATIENT. It's Hannah who is the film's true emotional center (with Katharine more of a major supporting role) and Binoche plays her with the perfect amounts of hardness and softness, innocent and child-like one moment, then cool and wary the next, then back again. However, this quibble about how the female leads were categorized by the Academy doesn't change the fact that both Scott-Thomas and Binoche are spot-on in their portrayals of these two very different and very interesting women.

In the titular role of the "English" patient, Ralph Fiennes is also ideally cast. Fiennes has always excelled at playing frosty, hard-ass characters whose chilly exteriors mask volcanically explosive interiors. Here, he expressively conveys all of Laszlo Almasy's buried passion and frustrated desire with fluent gestures and eloquent glances. Fiennes and Scott-Thomas' chemistry is not the explosive kind that you might expect, but more of a simmering variety that is absolutely perfect for this couple who circle each other warily while trying to contain their desire for one another - until it can no longer be contained. I would daresay that Count Laszlo Almasy is a career-defining role for Fiennes. We're quite glad that he will be playing the new M in the James Bond franchise.

As for the rest of principal cast, Willem Dafoe, Naveen Andrews, Jurgen Prochnow, James Whatley, Clive Merrison, and Colin Firth are all just as ideally-cast as the three main leads. Dafoe manages to balance both light and dark in his portrayal of the mysterious (and possibly vengeful) Caravaggio, while Andrews has the right mix of boyish charisma and steely professionalism to make Kip alluring and attractive to Hannah. Then there's Firth as the cuckold husband of Katharine: Jeffrey Clifton. We're so accustomed to seeing Firth as a romantic lead in films like BRIDGET JONES' DIARY 1 & 2, PRIDE AND PREJUDICE, and EASY VIRTUE, that it is something of a surprise to see him play a less assured and idealized character like Jeffrey. However, he proves his range by making the character both sympathetic and pitiful at the same time.

Another lovely aspect of THE ENGLISH PATIENT is the evocative score by Gabriel Yared, which also won an Academy Award for Best Original Score. The haunting strings and flutes echo the film's African and Egyptian settings, while also lending the surreal, dreamy atmosphere we mentioned before. Yared's music does a lot towards subtly underscoring the emotional intensity of Almasy, Hannah, Katharine, Kip, and Caravaggio - as well as the threads that bind them together. Definitely a score to play on a romantic interlude with someone you love.

Ultimately, THE ENGLISH PATIENT is a film that is not for the short of attention. It is too languid and meandering for that kind of audience. For those patient folks willing to be surprised and enchanted, however, it is a treasure.

Saturday, January 5, 2013

REVIEW UPDATE: The Final Five - and Review # 500...


Hello, folks... with the posting of the terrific FRIED GREEN TOMATOES, we are down to our final five reviews. Please note them below:

# 496 - THE ENGLISH PATIENT (AKA: Juliette Binoche, I Think I Love You...)

# 497 - NEVER LET ME GO (AKA: Andrew Garfield, I Will Always Love You...)

# 498 - THE STEPFORD WIVES (AKA: Stepford, Connecticut - I Would Have To Be Insane To Love You)

# 499 - MICHAEL CLAYTON (AKA: George Clooney, You Already Know I Love You...)

# 500 - ???????????????????











Our "Mystery Review" for # 500 will be revealed on the day it posts. This was a recommend from a friend, and I’m glad I listened to him. The film is terrific. And it speaks directly to the experiences of our forefathers - wherever they may have originated from before arriving here in America. What is the movie, you ask? Well, I will keep that card close to my chest for now. But here are three clues:

1. It stars the lovely and wonderful Charlotte Gainsbourg and the handsome Vincenzo Amato...

2. It is partly set on Ellis Island, New York, and partly in Sicily, Italy (what a combo)...

3. And here is an image collage from the movie:


Any ideas? Hmmmmmmm.....

Anyhow, please expect the reviews for THE ENGLISH PATIENT, NEVER LET ME GO, and MICHAEL CLAYTON to post tomorrow… then our final and 500th review will post next weekend.

Have a great weekend, all… ; )

# 495 - FRIED GREEN TOMATOES (1992)


FRIED GREEN TOMATOES (1992 - COMEDY / DRAMA / ROMANCE) **** out of *****

(Ah, the Deep South... where nothing is awesome unless it's been deep fried to death in an ocean of hot sizzling oil...)

yum, yum…

CAST: Mary Louise Parker, Kathy Bates, Mary Stuart Masterson, Jessica Tandy, Chris O'Donnell, Cicely Tyson, Tim Scott, Lois Smith, Stan Shaw, Gary Basaraba, Grayson Fricke.

DIRECTOR: Jon Avnet

WARNING: Some SPOILERS and some compelling reasons to go take a culinary vacation in Alabama - straight ahead



IT'S LIKE THIS: Humbly speaking, I circled the globe several times when I was younger. I've been to more countries than I would care to share, for modesty's sake. But there are only four places on this Earth whose names (or mere mention of them) suddenly make me as hungry as a cat in a tuna cannery. They are: (1) the Philippine Islands, which I always associate with scrumptious visions of adobo (meat stewed in garlic, soy sauce, and vinegar), sinigang (fish or meat and vegetables stewed in a sour tamarind fruit broth), leche flan (Spanish custard but done with Philippine flair), and lumpia (egg rolls so deliciously bite-sized that you could ingest 100 of them without realizing it); (2) Spain, which colonized the Philippines for over 3 centuries and passed on their culinary traditions to the islanders, and where I am always haunted by images of tapas of all sorts and sizes; (3) Italy, which is basically synonymous with pastas and pizzas and gelatos of all shades of the culinary rainbow; and last but not the least: (4) the American Deep South, where I spent some time in my twenties, and where I must have gorged on every possible fried food there is to sample - including fried pickle (the mind reels) and... fried green tomatoes.

That last bit is germane to our next review, because, well, it's the fucking title of the movie. And there are at least two scenes in the flick where the characters chow down the stuff like it's Southern Crack. Can't say I blame them... because that shit looks good, son. Anyhow, our story starts in modern-day (read: 1992) Alabama where me meet one of our heroines. She is Evelyn Couch (Kathy Bates). Evelyn is one of those lovely, elegant ladies who is always gracious and kind and patient and letting things slide. We first glimpse this tendency for stoicism and sacrifice when the crazy aunt she and her husband Ed (Tim Scott) are visiting in a nursing home throws some blunt objects at her.

Anyhow, Evelyn leaves Ed alone with the old biddy - and retires to the nursing home's lounge to stuff her face with the Nestle corporation's entire line of candy products starting with Mr. Goodbar. Fortunately, before she can eat herself into a sugar frenzy, she is interrupted by Ninny Threadgoode (Jessica Tandy), a temporary resident of the nursing home. Ninny basically pirouettes in and starts chatting up Evelyn in that way of crazy old ladies everywhere, which basically means that Evelyn has to give Ninny her full attention lest she get bitch-slapped.

Ninny spins the yarn of her sister-in-law Idgie Threadgoode (Mary Stuart Masterson) and Ruth Jamison (Mary Louise Parker), two best friends from the 1930's who ran a bustling cafe called The WhistleStop in a small town nearby. Apparently, Idgie was your classic unpredictable wild child, while Ruth was your average good girl. Naturally, these two clicked like Andrew Garfield's small but perfect ass and the Spiderman costume he covered it with. In other words, a match made in heaven. Seems Idgie rescued Ruth from her abusive asshole husband and helped her raise her son, Buddy Jr. (Grayson Fricke), who is named after Ruth's dead childhood sweetheart - who was Idgie's beloved older brother. No wonder Ruth's husband is such a douche to her - she named his son after a ghost who used to fuck her.

Anyway, in the present day, Evelyn is so inspired by the saga of Idgie and Ruth that she begins to feel empowered. She does the following: (1) stop eating, like, 100 candy bars every day; (2) start exercising; and most important of all: (3) stop attending gay-ass feminist classes where she and her fellow mid-life crisis victims are forced to examine their vaginas in front of each other. I wish I was kidding about that last part, but it is my sad duty to report that is actually part of the film. They don't actually show it (thank you, Jesus) but they do talk about it and we see the heifers lower them panties to the ground in preparation. It's enough to make a straight man go gay - or at least so says Chris Evans' Twin.

Meanwhile, just as Evelyn's storyline starts to heat up, so does Ruth and Idgie's. Ruth's abusive asshole husband goes missing, and Idgie is accused of killing him and hiding the body - since she once told the bastard that she would kill him if he ever beat up Ruth again. Well, if the shoe fits... What happens when Idgie is put on trial? Is she taking the blame to save someone else who really did the killing? Was it Ruth? Or their loyal handyman, Big George (Stan Shaw)? Or is it George's mother Sipsy (Cicely Tyson)? Or is it... someone else? How will Idgie's story from the past affect Evelyn's in the present? Will one woman draw strength from the other? If so, how? And the most important questions of all: what is the best cornmeal to use for fried green tomatoes? Should you dip the tomatoes in the egg wash first? Or should you do it after you dip them in the cornmeal? And what the fuck is up with this new trend of using Panko breadcrumbs? Is this a new Yuppie way of doing a classic Southern recipe? Would Idgie and Ruth approve?

Whatever. Just get me some. Right now.


BUT, SERIOUSLY: In our previous reviews, we've talked about "Warm Blanket Movies." Basically, these films celebrate friendship, family, and ties that bind us all together. Films like MY BIG FAT GREEK WEDDING, STEEL MAGNOLIAS, SUNSHINE CLEANING, AWAY WE GO, THE KIDS ARE ALL RIGHT, LOST IN TRANSLATION, THE DESCENDANTS, SLIDING DOORS, and many others are prime examples of this genre. They do not emphasize action, suspense, spectacle, or plot twists but, rather, relationships and connections. The people, in essence, are more important than the plot.

FRIED GREEN TOMATOES is one of the most entertaining of the "Warm Blanket Movies", not only because of the deft way it expounds on the themes mentioned above, but also by making us laugh and, yes, tear up in the process. The film also has a graceful structure, with Evelyn and Ninny's growing friendship in the present echoing the tight-knit bond between Ruth and Idgie in the past. It's arguable which thread is stronger, since both are very solid and so well-written and well-acted. But, ultimately, it's because both stories are so strong that the movie retains a nice balance.

Contrast FRIED GREEN TOMATOES with the similarly-structured POSSESSION from 2002 starring Gwyneth Paltrow and Aaron Eckhart: in that film, the plot thread involving Paltrow and Eckhart's modern-day sleuths paled in comparison to the moving, romantic thread in the past with Jennifer Ehle and Jeremy Northam's Victorian poets - resulting in an imbalance that hampered the film. Whenever we would switch back to modern-day London with Paltrow and Eckhart, the film dragged because they were not as interesting as Ehle and Northam, their counterparts from the past. With FRIED GREEN TOMATOES, this does not happen, because the characters and situations in the present are just as interesting as the ones from the past.

What is also great about FRIED GREEN TOMATOES is not just the main plot threads, but also the little gems and nuggets that director Jon Avnet and his writers insert here and there. There's the popular scene of Evelyn finally standing up for herself and ramming the car of two airheads who stole her parking spot at supermarket. Then there's the lovely scene where Ruth accompanies Idgie on a late-night train raid to give canned goods to homeless and starving families. There's also the touching scene where Evelyn very thoughtfully surprises Ninny on her birthday with some friend green tomatoes - Ninny's favorite food. My favorite "gem", however, is when Idgie approaches Smokey Lonesome, a vagrant dining at the Whistle Stop Cafe. Smokey, used to being treated like dirt, thinks she is about to ask him to leave. Instead, Idgie takes him for a walk and comforts him, telling him a lovely story that teaches him he's just as good as everyone else around him. This perfectly illustrates the essence of Idgie (kind and fearless), but also the essence of the film itself, which states that our strength ultimately lies in what we do for others.

Mary Stuart Masterson is simply wonderful as Idgie, turning her into one of my most favorite movie characters. Masterson is a bravura blend of humor, fire, and hidden fragility - she is amazing and delivers a career-defining performance and a classic character. Idgie grew up in the Deep South (a very traditional place) in a time when women were expected to stay in the kitchen, and be seen and not heard - and where lesbianism was definitely not smiled on. In the novel the movie is based on, "Fried Green Tomatoes At The WhistleStop Cafe" by Fannie Flagg, Ruth and Idgie had a more obvious romantic connection.

However, director Avnet chose to downplay the lesbian connection between Ruth and Idgie, despite the wishes of his leads, and left their characters' connection more ambiguous. There is still a very strong emotional bond in the film between Ruth and Idgie, though, and somehow the cinematic version is all the more heartbreaking because of the "Love That Dare Not Speak Its Name" aspect that pervades it. Especially towards the end when all of Idgie's unspoken love for Ruth bubbles up in one heartfelt line during a crucial scene: "There are so many things I want to say to you...." Ultimately, Mary Louise Parker proves to be a great foil for Masterson, making Ruth the gentle Yin to Idgie's fiery Yang. These two are a great, memorable screen couple.

For the present day storyline, Kathy Bates and Jessica Tandy hold their own. Bates' crowd-pleasing and audience-endearing performance is one of her best. Evelyn is a character that most of us can relate to: someone who swallows a lot of outrage and abuse under a gracious exterior - until enough is enough. The aforementioned scene where she demolishes the car in the supermarket parking lot is one of the most popular scenes in filmdom because it marks the shift in Evelyn, from put-upon victim to assertive person. Who hasn't dreamt of finally standing up for themselves in such a way? Bates sells not only the scene, but the character altogether. Jessica Tandy matches Bates' warmth, scene for scene, and proves to be an appropriately whimsical partner to the similarly quirky Evelyn. Tandy even manages to make Ninny a bit mysterious and elusive - which pays off beautifully in the film's final scene and its haunting twist. Bottom line: just as Masterson and Parker meshed well as Ruth and Idgie, so too do Tandy and Bates click as Evelyn and Ninny.

No ensemble film set in the Deep South would be complete without a colorful gallery of supporting characters. They are essayed by a wonderful group of actors: Stan Shaw, Chris O'Donnell, Cicely Tyson, Ray Basaraba, Tim Scott, and Grayson Fricke. O'Donnell is particularly heartbreaking (and handsome) in his small but very important scene as Idgie's beloved older brother, Buddy. Ultimately, FRIED GREEN TOMATOES is like a warm quilt made up of many beautiful and engaging pieces, and the supporting players are just as important as the four leads.

In closing, please soak in one of the songs from the FRIED GREEN TOMATOES soundtrack: Paul Young's version of "What Becomes Of The Broken-Hearted?"

TRIVIA: "What Becomes Of The Broken-Hearted?" was originally supposed to be the theme song for THE BODYGUARD, intended to be sung by the late, lovely Whitney Houston. However, when the producers and music supervisors of THE BODYGUARD learned that "What Becomes Of The Broken-Hearted?" was being used for FRIED GREEN TOMATOES (which was also in production at the same time), they didn't want to have any duplication. So BODYGUARD star/producer Kevin Costner chose instead to remake Dolly Parton's "I Will Always Love You" for co-star Houston. Other folks behind the decision also felt from the beginning that, thematically, "What Becomes Of The Broken-Hearted?" was not appropriate for THE BODYGUARD, because it is a lighter, more upbeat song that conveyed a different kind of loss. They felt that "I Will Always Love You" was more fitting for THE BODYGUARD, because it is a somber ballad about sacrifice, and walking away from someone you deeply love because you love them enough to do what's best for them - even if it means sacrificing your own feelings. This is a key theme of THE BODYGUARD - and the lyrics for "I Will Always Love You" are essentially a bittersweet, noble farewell from one lover to another. In the end, this decision proved very successful for Costner and Houston's film, because Whitney Houston's haunting version of "I Will Always Love You" is now one of the best-loved songs in film history - and THE BODYGUARD went on to become a worldwide hit.

However, for FRIED GREEN TOMATOES, the more upbeat "What Becomes Of The Broken-Hearted?" is absolutely perfect...

From FRIED GREEN TOMATOES: Paul Young's "What Becomes Of The Broken-Hearted?":




And, a bonus: from THE BODYGUARD, the late, lovely Whitney Houston's "I Will Always Love You...":