Monday, February 21, 2005
this movie review has some content, but none of it is worthwhile
Hoo boy, The Aviator was one damn good picture. But I fucking hate it when people call movies pictures. Tony, the guy who sits behind me, and wants to make IMAX movies, always calls them pictures, and half the time I have no idea what the hell he's talking about. I'm all for anachronistic vocabulary, but for some reason that one just rankles like nobody's business.
But so, The Aviator is a beaut. I've only seen two of the most acceptable picture nominees, and although Sideways is pretty good, The Aviator is far better. Sideways was about as "small" as a "small" movie could be. It was well-written and well-acted, but it didn't resonate or touch me in any way. And though the performances were good across the board, none of them were outstanding, or even all that notable. Giamatti's great in everything, but in Sideways he seemed to be doing his Harvey Pekar half the time. All that did was make me think of American Splendor, and how much more I liked that movie than this one. Virginia Madsen, one of the women most responsible for first acquainting me with the female anatomy, was fine and servicable, but nothing in her performance stood out as being extraordinary. She wasn't any better than Sandra Oh, for that matter. Lowell was probably the best of the main four, but he's always been a personal fave of mine, and his role didn't really seem like a stretch for him. Sideways is still probably one of the five best movies I've seen from 2004, but it can't even begin to touch the greatness of The Aviator, much less the real best picture, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.
But back to the Aviator. It's a fantastic film. DiCaprio is excellent, surprisingly enough, putting in probably the best head acting job I've seen since American Splendor. I haven't seen Ray, so no idea if Foxx licks him in that dept, but it's odd how everybody's acting like it's a foregone conclusion. Is he that much better than DiCaprio? Or is sentimentality mucking stuff up? Would there be riots if they gave Foxx the supporting dude and Leo the other? Of course the actor category is about as fucked a one you can find. Crowe should have won in '99 and '01, but instead got it in '00. Denzel was entertaining in a flashy role, but Crowe's turn in This Beautiful Head was the only thing that defunked that film's miserable stench. He single-handedly made that film, but got shut out while it won every single other award ever created. But Leo is definitely a deserving champ, if only because he knows how to wear his mustaches.
Anyway, The Aviator was good. Better than Melvin and Howard, mostly because there were less Mary Steenburgen breasts. But that one rocked "Fortunate Son", so its got it's shit together too. Maybe it's a toss-up, then.
We hope to catch Ray before Sunday, and expect to watch Hotel Rwanda someday. That Peter Pan crap can go take a Brody, for all I care.
Hoo boy, The Aviator was one damn good picture. But I fucking hate it when people call movies pictures. Tony, the guy who sits behind me, and wants to make IMAX movies, always calls them pictures, and half the time I have no idea what the hell he's talking about. I'm all for anachronistic vocabulary, but for some reason that one just rankles like nobody's business.
But so, The Aviator is a beaut. I've only seen two of the most acceptable picture nominees, and although Sideways is pretty good, The Aviator is far better. Sideways was about as "small" as a "small" movie could be. It was well-written and well-acted, but it didn't resonate or touch me in any way. And though the performances were good across the board, none of them were outstanding, or even all that notable. Giamatti's great in everything, but in Sideways he seemed to be doing his Harvey Pekar half the time. All that did was make me think of American Splendor, and how much more I liked that movie than this one. Virginia Madsen, one of the women most responsible for first acquainting me with the female anatomy, was fine and servicable, but nothing in her performance stood out as being extraordinary. She wasn't any better than Sandra Oh, for that matter. Lowell was probably the best of the main four, but he's always been a personal fave of mine, and his role didn't really seem like a stretch for him. Sideways is still probably one of the five best movies I've seen from 2004, but it can't even begin to touch the greatness of The Aviator, much less the real best picture, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.
But back to the Aviator. It's a fantastic film. DiCaprio is excellent, surprisingly enough, putting in probably the best head acting job I've seen since American Splendor. I haven't seen Ray, so no idea if Foxx licks him in that dept, but it's odd how everybody's acting like it's a foregone conclusion. Is he that much better than DiCaprio? Or is sentimentality mucking stuff up? Would there be riots if they gave Foxx the supporting dude and Leo the other? Of course the actor category is about as fucked a one you can find. Crowe should have won in '99 and '01, but instead got it in '00. Denzel was entertaining in a flashy role, but Crowe's turn in This Beautiful Head was the only thing that defunked that film's miserable stench. He single-handedly made that film, but got shut out while it won every single other award ever created. But Leo is definitely a deserving champ, if only because he knows how to wear his mustaches.
Anyway, The Aviator was good. Better than Melvin and Howard, mostly because there were less Mary Steenburgen breasts. But that one rocked "Fortunate Son", so its got it's shit together too. Maybe it's a toss-up, then.
We hope to catch Ray before Sunday, and expect to watch Hotel Rwanda someday. That Peter Pan crap can go take a Brody, for all I care.
