Into The Wild

Origin: U.S. (Paramount Vantage, River Road Entertainment, Art Linson Productions) 2007
Length: 140 minutes
Format: Color
Director: Sean Penn
Producer: Sean Penn, Art Linson, William Pohlad
Screenplay: Sean Penn
Photography: Eric Gautier
Music: Michael Brook, Kaki King, Eddit Vedder
Cast: Emile Hirsch, Marcia Gay Harden, William Hurt, Jena Malone, Brian Dierker, Catherine Keener, Vince Vaughn, Kristen Stewart, Hal Holbrook
Oscar Nominations: Hal Holbrook(best supporting actor), Jay Cassidy(best film editing)
Links: Into The Wild Wiki, Into The Wild novel Wiki

---

After graduating Emory University in 1992, Christopher McCandless, an idealistic young man from a privileged background, gave away all his worldly possessions and set out to discover his place in the world. He denied himself the comforts of contemporary life and struggled to achieve an old-fashioned sense of truth. Hitchhiking to Alaska, he made camp in the wilderness of Denali National Park, where he lived in the raw until the exigencies of circumstance took over and he slowly starved to death. When his body was later found inside an abandoned bus, his story became a cause celebre. On the one hand, his pursuit of basic truth and happiness was seen as laudable, even heroic; on the other, he died foolishly and alone, a cautionary tale about human kind's inability to live beyond the realms of civilization.

The Big Red One(John)

I had never heard of this movie before we decided to watch it for the blog. I knew most of the names and faces: Lee Marvin, Robert Carradine and Mark Hammill. So, I expected to be blown away. However, I think, all in all, this movie fell a little short of that expectation.

From an acting perspective, I think there was really a lack of emotion in the movie. Very rarely did I feel like the people in this epic war movie felt any kind of pain or sadness. I'm not sure if this was the intention of the film but it really sucked the realism out of the film for me. However, despite the lack of emotion, I thought the delivery of lines and the situations the actors were put in were pretty good. Lee Marvin was born to be in war films. His face and general demeanor fits perfectly in the genre. I was a little off-put by the narration by Robert Carradine. I felt he didn't fit the part to do the narration and I would've much rather preferred Lee Marvin. Of course, that would've changed the film. I think Mark Hammill was my second favorite in the acting department in the movie. When you compare his performance in Star Wars: A New Hope to this, it's like comparing apples to oranges(oranges being much much better :P). When I said very rarely did I feel emotion from the actors in this movie, ninety percent of the exceptions came from Mark Hammill. He did an excellent job and I am glad I got to see him shine in this movie.

There were a few confusing parts in this movie that I didn't understand. Some of the military "tactics" really threw me for a loop. However, the story is definitely where I think the movie's strengths lie. The underlying message of the movie is that soldiers don't murder, they kill. You are presented with this early in the movie and it gets brought up quite a few times until the closure at the end. I thought this was an interesting message and it's ambiguous enough that much debate could be had. As far as how the movie gets to the ending, I thought it was a good showcase of what WWII would've been like. I'm not entirely sure that everything that happened in the movie was believable but maybe for the most part, it was.

The cinematography was pretty good. The camera explored a lot of different angles that I found to be interesting. The opening scene's coloring technique I had seen before in Schindler's List and I wondered if this is where Spielberg got it from. And, I wasn't sure if the film's grainy quality was on purpose or just a sign of the movie's age, but I liked it nonetheless. One thing that was off-putting was the grenade explosions. It was extremely obvious that it wasn't a real grenade. The setting was very authentic and made the world come alive. Lastly, the sound was pretty darn good. I could hear the release of an empty clip from a gun. The gunfire was really good and explosions were quite loud.

Overall, I enjoyed the movie. There were some moments that confused me, the acting was really devoid of emotion and there were some effects that didn't come through for me. But, I did enjoy the story and the underlying message and there were some interesting camera shots going on that kept me eager to see the next scene.

I'm giving this movie an 8.0 out of 10.

- John Murphy

The Big Red One (Matt)

This movie interested me primarily because the director, Samuel Fuller, was actually a member of the Big Red One during World War 2. Many of the events that occur in this film were actually experienced by him, and being able to see a direct translation of the experience of war to the screen by someone who actually lived it is an opportunity that I did not wish to pass up.

That said I wasn't a great fan of this film.

I had a difficult time connecting with this film. I was not able to follow the story very well, I didn't care about the characters like I felt I should, and I spent the majority of the time watching it wondering exactly what was going on.

The acting wasn't that bad. It's nothing to write home about, but it's not bad. The action was solid. The sets were well done. I think if I have to blame a single element of this film for my disconnection, it would have to be the storytelling. There is just too much going on. This is likely not entirely the fault of the director, as apparently his original film was cut down by an hour or so, but coming from a time where long stories are told in episodic movies, I can't help but feel that this movie should have been a series of several movies and not one long disjointed mess. If the story had guided us through a single event I would be saying something very different, but as it was I just didn't like it.

The movie isn't all bad though. The acting wasn't horrible, and Lee Marvin was actually pretty great. He was easily my favorite character of the movie. His acting captured the spirit of the sergeant, and I found myself seeing him as I believe the other characters in the movie did. He carried an aura of authority and knowing that could have only been portrayed through good acting.

The sets were also well done. I'm not sure where the movie was filmed but I never once doubted I was in Europe during WW2. The crumbling towns, the Italian landscapes, the concentration camp, all were a visual delight to see. It was like being transported through time, and definitely deserves a mention.

I guess I'll give this 3 cold butts out of 10.

~Matt

The Big Red One

Origin: U.S. (Lorimar Television) 1980
Length: 163 minutes(restored version)
Format: Metrocolor
Director: Samuel Fuller
Producer: Gene Corman
Screenplay: Samuel Fuller
Photography: Adam Greenberg
Music: Dana Kaproff
Cast: Lee Marvin, Mark Hamill, Robert Carradine, Bobby Di Cicco, Kelly Ward, Stephane Audran, Siegfried Rauch, Serge Marquand, Charles Macaulay, Alain Doutey, Maurice Marsac, Colin Gilbert, Joseph Clark, Ken Campbell, Doug Werner
Cannes Film Festival: Samuel Fuller(Golden Palm nomination)
Links: The Big Red One Trailer, The Big Red One Wiki

---

The most ambitious war film in Samuel Fuller's career, a chronicle of his own First Infantry Division in World War II, The Big Red One was a long time coming. When it finally made it to the screen, a wholesale reediting by the studio and a tacked-on narration(by filmmaker Jim McBride) made it something less than Fuller had intended - he originally provided the studio with four-hour and two-hour cuts, both of which were rejected. Fuller enthusiasts still hold out hope that either or both of these versions might someday be restored. Nevertheless, it's a grand-style, idiosyncratic war epic, with wonderful poetic ideas, intense emotions, and haunting images rich in metaphysical portent.

There Will Be Blood (Matt)

If you would have asked me before I saw this film if I thought a movie about a guy in the early 1900's building an oil company literally from the ground up would be interesting I would have laughed in your face. That just sound boring. In fact, the first time I saw this movie I was hardly excited. I was dug in and prepared for 2 hours and 30 minutes of quality snooze time. That sleepy never came however. Not one time during this movie was I bored, and that includes two separate viewings.

So you might be wondering, why is this movie not boring? How could a movie about a guy building an oil company be that interesting? Well read on and I'll tell you.

Lets start with the cinematography. Beautiful. The stark landscape of America in the 1900's was surprisingly a visual feast. The days were very bright and the nights were very dark. The landscapes were dusty and covered with sparse grass, and all of the colors seemed muted to the point that the entire movie seemed washed with tans and browns. The shots were set up to showcase this in spades. The sets and costumes were created in such a way that I felt transported to that time period. I never once doubted that I was in the middle of America around 1900. All of these elements were crafted wonderfully by the movie crew and then captured with a near perfection by the director.

Next up is the music. This is one of the strangest movie scores that I can remember, but it completely fits with the context of the film. It almost feels like a horror movie score in a lot of ways, there is a lot of violin tones to be found here, and sometimes in unusual places. It is used as a tool to create tension in most cases, and it does that quite well. When you combine the unpredictability of Daniel Plainview with the tense violin tones you come away with a very unsettling experience.

Last and certainly not least is the absolutely amazing acting. Daniel Day-Lewis proves that he is one of the most qualified actors in Hollywood in his performance. He won the Oscar for male performance for this movie and it was well deserved. He takes a character that has got to be hard to portray and just runs away with it. Every scene he appears in, which is with very few exceptions the entire movie, is just magic. This quite honestly is one of the most amazing acting jobs I have ever seen. The character of Daniel Plainview is complicated, it's hard to describe him. He is smart but he is also crazy. He keeps a lot of himself hidden inside and yet he has an explosiveness inside him that his craziness tends to draw out occasionally. Daniel Day-Lewis was able to take all of this and put it into a performance that left the character completely believable. It was incredible.

10 wooden bowling pins out of 10.

~Matt

There Will Be Blood(John)

There is a reason this movie was nominated for so many Oscars. There is a reason Daniel Day-Lewis won the Oscar for best actor. This is a freaking amazing movie and, whether you like it or you hate it, it's the pure definition of a movie you must see before you die.

Answer: Daniel Day-Lewis's performance. Question: Why is this movie so amazing? Time and time again, Daniel Day-Lewis has awed audiences with his performances. His performance in There Will Be Blood does not disappoint. He's known to be a very methodical actor and very picky about the movies he is in. This man shows us a perfect progression of a person whose greed an insanity basically destroys him. Daniel Plainview gets his wish: wealth beyond measure. But at the same time, he loses his sanity and his family because of that greed and competitiveness. I rarely find myself smiling during a movie, not because of a humorous moment, but because of the elation that I am feeling watching this person act on the screen. If Daniel Day-Lewis was not cast in this movie, it may very well have been forgettable. Not to leave the supporting cast out, the boy who played Eli/Paul Sunday was also excellent. He was able to be annoying and sympathetic at the same time which was very critical to the movie. The little boy(H.W. Plainview) also did a pretty good job.

The plot is fairly streamlined. Daniel Plainview is good at a certain thing and he has a specific goal in life. We follow his realization of that goal throughout the movie. Along the way, things hinder him from completing the goal. The main reason for this movie is to show the genius(and insanity) of Daniel Plainview. Plainview is a genius oil man. He's at the top of his game. But when it comes to connecting with other people, he's never been able to do that very well. We as the audience, learn exactly what's most important to him: wealth and winning. So, although the plot is minimal, what we experience along the way is amazing. Lastly, the last line of dialogue in the movie I thought was so perfect. It summed up the movie in numerous ways and was perfect.

The music was interesting. The music really consisted of clanks and clacking noises to simulate suspenseful moments and smooth swaying sounds when things were calm. I almost think this was a detriment to the film. When watching No Country For Old Men, there was hardly any music. And I think that made me more engrossed in the film. I wasn't taken out of the film with the music in There Will Be Blood, but I think it wasn't really necessary in some places. The visuals on the other hand were stunning. More than once, we are treated to these shots that pan out and give us a birds-eye view of the land. That combined with the authenticity of the sets made me truly get sucked into the world of 1900s oil drilling America.

There Will Be Blood is a movie that probably won't appeal to everyone. It takes a willingness to get sucked into the world of oil drilling and the insanity that Daniel Day-Lewis provides. But if you get sucked in, get ready for one heck of a good movie. I'll give it a 9.7 out of 10.

- John Murphy

There Will Be Blood

Origin: U.S. (Ghoulardi Film Company, Paramount Vantage, Mirimax Films) 2007
Length: 158 minutes
Format: Color
Director: Paul Thomas Anderson
Producer: Paul Thomas Anderson, JoAnne Sellar, Daniel Lupi
Screenplay: Paul Thomas Anderson
Photography: Robert Elswit
Music: Jonny Greenwood
Cast: Daniel Day-Lewis, Paul Dano, Kevin J. O'Connor, Kevin Breznahan
Oscars: Daniel Day-Lewis(best actor), Robert Elswit(best cinematography)
Oscar nominations: Daniel Lupi, JoAnne Sellar, Paul Thomas Anderson(best picture), Paul Thomas Anderson(best director), Paul Thomas Anderson(best adapted screenplay), Jack Fisk, Jim Erickson(best art direction), Dylan Tichenor(best film editing), Matthew Wood, Christopher Scarabosio(best sound editing).
Links: There Will Be Blood Trailer, There Will Be Blood Wiki, Oil! Wiki

---

Paul Thomas Anderson's excoriating study of greed and the both constructive and destructive powers of competitiveness and ambition is a stunning achievement by the still young writer-director. Using Upton Sinclair's muckraking 1927 novel Oil! as a jumping-off point, Anderson creates a vastly cinematic, darkly personal tale of one man seemingly without a single redemptive characteristic. The nuance of the storytelling, concentrating on long, almost silent passages and huge, open panoramas, There Will Be Blood delves to the most painful depths of a man who, by many measures, would have been considered both a success and a genius, but in Anderson's hands is painted as a charismatic sociopath.