Disc Type

“On the 15th of May, in the jungle of Nool, in the heat of the day, in the cool of the pool. He was splashing enjoying the jungle’s great joys, when Horton, the Elephant, heard a small noise. Then he heard it again, just a very faint yelp, as if some tiny person were calling for help…”

If you’re like me, you remember the Dr. Seuss specials from the 1960’s. At this time of the year, The Grinch comes first to mind. In that wonderful span of cartoon specials was the story of the elephant Horton, who hears voices coming from a speck he carries around on a flower. The story revolves around Horton’s attempts to protect the very tiny town of Whoville which exists on that speck. None of his friends believe him, just as none of the Whoville scientist’s friends believe that he has spoken to a giant elephant in the sky. Before long the story plays out, and we all remember the moral that a person’s a person, no matter how small. That Chuck Jones effort is a dear memory for most of us from that generation.

My One And Only is based on a George Hamilton autobiographical story. It’s probably a tale that his fans know well. It wasn’t one I was at all aware of. The screenplay was written by Charlie Peters. Hamilton himself is a producer on the film, so we can assume that the story unfolds in much the same way he intended. Like most autobiographical pieces, it has a limited audience. Fans of the subject are certainly going to be quite interested. Others who consider the subject of some note might also have an interest in the material. Unfortunately, it’s like watching vacation or baby slides. After some time you can get lost and bored watching the high or low points in someone else’s life. This is just that kind of experience.

Anne (Zellweger) comes back early from a trip to find her husband, big band leader Dan (Bacon) in bed with another woman. She immediately decides to leave him and take their sons George (Lerman) and Robbie (Rendall) on the road to find herself a new husband. Anne is the typical southern aristocrat and believes she needs to find someone to give her the good life she has become accustomed to. Their first stop is Boston where she runs into old flame Wallace (Weber) who just wants to borrow money because his business is failing. Next she gets engaged to military man Harlan (Noth) who just wants a family so that he can be a “top dog”. Next it’s on to Pittsburg, and it’s Oliver and Charlie. Next stop St. Louis and a paint store magnate who’s crazy as a loon. Finally, it’s California to give Robbie a chance to be an actor. Along the way the family learns about themselves and the man they left behind. They finally settle in California where it’s George who ends up with the acting career.

The day that most of us in the home video review business has been dreading has finally arrived. Anchor Bay has sent me my first Blu-ray screener. For those who might not know, a screener is a disc given to guys like me to write a review of the given film or television series. Unlike what we call Final Product, the disc often comes in a sleeve with no case or box art. The disc itself is usually does not include graphics, containing merely the name of the film and possibly the studio. The contents might or might not reflect what you, the consumer will get should you decide to purchase the disc. DVD screeners have often been single layer DVD-R copies, which look far worse than what the Final Product might look and sound like. Often the name of the studio and something like “property of” appears anywhere from constantly to every few minutes in the viewing area of the film. In the case of this Blu-ray screener, it appears that the contents could well be what the consumer will see, but lacking an actual consumer disc, I just can’t be sure. In the past, we here at Upcomingdiscs simply declined to review these types of releases. When I took over in December, I decided to include the titles, but avoid reviewing all of the aspects of the disc that we simply can’t be sure about. Thus was born the No Huddle review.

Now, these screeners are used for any number of reasons. The most common seems to be a worry that a reviewer might make copies of the film and try and sell or release the film in some way. Since we often get titles up to weeks before they street at your local video store, there is concern that we might “beat them to the punch” so to speak. Other reasons could involve expense and the amount of confidence the studio has in the release itself. Up until now, Blu-rays have been exempt from this process. The expense of making a limited run Blu-ray isn’t very economical, and the piracy worries are, for the moment, alleviated by the fact that no one has yet broken a Blu-ray to pirate. Whatever the reason, it’s a sad day for us in the business, one that we hope will not become some industry standard. I know it might sound a lot like just some ingrate complaining that he didn’t get a good enough freebie, but it really takes away our ability to adequately inform you about the quality of a release. We’ve always taken pride here at Upcomingdiscs to provide you with the most complete information we can about a given release. A screener simply makes it impossible. So, excuse the long “inside baseball” explanation. So, what about this particular film?

Superman: The Animated Series was made in the same fashion as Batman: The Animated Series. The tone was a little more serious and a lot more action. It was first produced in 1996 and made 54 episodes through the year 2000. The show received high praise for raising the bar but at the same time keeping what was important to the mythos of Superman. In fact, it even received a nomination for an Emmy. Besides Smallville, this probably stands out as the best television adaption of the one known as Superman, the Last Son of Krypton and hero to the planet Earth (and beyond).

Most of us know the story of Superman, but perhaps it is best that we run it over a little bit adapted to the actual animated series. Krypton is approaching devastation but only one scientist believes it to be true, Jor-El. He feeds his information to a computer named Brainiac who is in charge of the planet and all of its major operations. The computer analyzes the information and says the planet is safe. Jor-El knows the computer is lying and can't convince the others of the danger.

Don’t You Forget about Me is a documentary/tribute to the late John Hughes.  Four amateur filmmakers set out to find answers to the questions, why did you leave? How did you capture adolescence so perfectly in your films? Why do your films remain a fixture in popular culture?  After obtaining interviews with many of the John Hughes alumni such as Ally Sheedy, Judd Nelson, Alan Ruck and Andrew McCarthy, the filmmakers came to the realization that they required an interview with John Hughes to complete the film. The documentary combines the interview footage as well as covers the filmmaker’s road trip from Toronto to Illinois to acquire an interview with the reclusive director. 

The marketing potential of this film rose greatly upon John Hughes’ unfortunate passing.  These filmmakers are deeply interested and moved by the works of Hughes and audiences can see that.  However, there is nothing compelling about the filmmakers.  They are not interesting or provocative. I found myself bored with their stories and opinions. What is problematic about this documentary is the forced fusion of two stories; One being the story of John Hughes and the other being the group of filmmakers. In my opinion, the latter should have been jettisoned altogether. Audiences are engaged in these interviews and suddenly the flow is disrupted with the tiresome antics of these four filmmakers.

James Gray’s Two Lovers revolves around the troubled Leonard Kraditor (Joaquin Phoenix).  Leonard has moved back into his childhood home to recover from his recent break up. In quick succession, two women enter Leonard’s life: Michelle (Gwyneth Paltrow), an entertaining and peculiar neighbor who transcends Leonard’s world and Sandra (Vinessa Shaw) a classy, traditional woman who is the daughter of a businessman attempting to purchase Leonard’s family business.  Leonard becomes confused between desire and love and the story unfolds from there.

The performances in this film are what resonate with the audience the most.  Joaquin Phoenix crafts his character from a dark place and displays great emotion in this role.  His complicated past slowly unravels throughout the film and audiences become more and more aware of his emotional instability. Phoenix is truly a great performer; it is unfortunate that he has taken a recent ‘break’ from acting.  Both of the female leads are strong as well.  Vinessa Shaw’s performance is passionate and powerful.  Her scenes with Phoenix are both romantic and realistic as well. Viewers can definitely identify with the dialogue between the two of them.  Gwyneth Paltrow is not breaking new ground with her performance.  However, her scenes are all remarkably interesting.  Her character is deeply conflicted by her current relationship and the growing relationship with Leonard.

In early-20th-Century Dublin, a winter's musical gathering is being held. The first two-thirds of the film takes us through the course of the evening, from the arrival of the guests, to the musical entertainment, to the dinner and its discussions (and arguments), and finally the departures. During the party, one is aware of a certain tension or distance between one couple: Donal McCann (nephew to the hostesses) and his wife (Anjelica Huston). As they prepare to leave, Huston hears one of the guests sing, and is rooted to the spot. Later, McCann asks her why the song affected her so much, and a painful memory from her past comes out.

John Huston's last film is suitably elegiac. Based on the James Joyce's short story of the same name, the movie is itself in short story form, barely clocking in at 73 minutes, and that's including the credits. The running time is just right, though, as this is a compact, moving tale, whose title does not become clear until the closing minutes. Were the film any longer, audiences would likely become restive at the apparent lack of story during the first two acts, but everything is present for good reason, working in unity towards a powerful conclusion. In all of this, the film is deeply faithful to the Joyce story. But the story also presents an enormous challenge: its conclusion relies on the thoughts of its protagonist, not on dialogue or action, the bread and butter of cinema. What to do? Huston takes what is probably the only path open to him, and goes for a voice-over as the camera gazes at mournful scenes of snow falling in the Irish night. The voice-over, having been absent until this very moment, is a bit jarring, even as its necessity is understandable. So the film might not be flawless, but it is a heartbreakingly moving valedictory gesture from one of cinema's greatest directors.

“You got everything money can buy, except what it can’t. It’s pride. Pride is what got you here. Losing is what brung you back. But, people like you, they need to be tested. They need a challenge.”

There have been a ton of boxing films. They’ve been popular going back to the Silent Era. Most of them have many of the same themes. But there was always something about Rocky that stood out above all of the rest. That “something” can’t really be described or defined. As the Supreme Court once said about the definition of obscenity: “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.” That’s all you can say about Rocky. Some might call it heart. That’s about as good a word for it as anything else. Rocky himself would call it “stuff in the basement”. It almost demeans it to put a word on it at all. Whatever you call it, you don’t necessarily see it in Rocky … you feel it.

Do you know what’s worse than watching a bad movie? It has to be watching three bad movies. Worse than that is watching three bad movies where it’s obvious to everyone involved in the films that they know they’re bad movies. It doesn’t take long until you begin to think that you’re the one everyone is really laughing about. You can picture a couple members of the cast sitting with the director all laughing their rear ends off at the poor rube who actually spends good money, and more importantly, their time, watching the piece of crap you just dropped into their DVD or Blu-ray player. It’ll take forever to get that stink out of my home theater.

Lately there has been a push to avoid crowds. There’s the whole H1N1 scare out there. Even the Vice-President says he wouldn’t be caught out in a crowd for nothing right now. Way to give us confidence there, Joe. If you too are afraid of crowds, going to a Kevin Smith film is the surest way to avoid them. I have been told by a few, and I do mean very few, Kevin Smith fans I’ve talked to that it’s not at all that the films suck. The problem, so they say, is that I just don’t get it. The idea is that Smith is some kind of artistic genius and a pedestrian reviewer like myself just doesn’t have the sophistication to understand his superior humor. I know that people like Smith likely believe it’s true. But, if I’m the one who just doesn’t get it, I’m not alone. The only folks who are alone are the unfortunate saps that went to see these films at the box office. The numbers don’t lie. These films fared horribly, and that’s being generous. The second Smithite argument is that, while the box office results were indeed pitiful, the films themselves were very low budget, so they did make more than they cost. Another bogus argument. No budget films have taken the world by storm. Look at the recent success of Paranormal Activity. That film cost less than any of these movies, a modest $15,000, and has raked in nearly a $150 million in box. Clerks pulled in just over $3 million. Chasing Amy just about $12 million. Jay And Silent Bob Strike Back broke the bank at just about $30 million. None of the films broke the top 100 for the year in which they were released. Yeah, I don’t get it. Apparently, a lot of people don’t get it.

We are in the late 1920s, and to the family manor comes Ben Barnes, in the company of new wife, Jessica Biel. That this woman is both American and a race car champion does not sit well with the very conservative mother Kristin Scott Thomas. That her nose is out of joint delights husband Colin Firth, a veteran of the Great War who, thoroughly world-weary and disillusioned with just about everything, wants nothing to do with the petty concerns and squabbles of his family. What follows is a clash of cultures and generations, veering between slapstick comedy and something rather darker.

I know you've all been waiting to see Jessica Biel finally star in a film whose script is based on a Noel Coward play, which was first adapted in 1928 by Alfred Hitchcock. All kidding aside, Biel acquits herself well, despite occasionally displaying some rather anachronistically defined pecs. The other cast members aren't having to strain themselves too much -- Scott Thomas has played repressed ice queens before, and Firth pretty much phones in his trademarked display of amused contempt -- but they are never less than efficient in their portrayals. That said, Scott Thomas and the performers playing her daughters have a tendency to project to the back of the hall, and otherwise remind us a bit too forcefully that this material was originally a play. The film is far from the jaunty comedy of mores that the case suggests -- it is rather too dark for that, by the end. It is an enjoyable, though finally slight, bit of entertainment.