April 2014 - Can't Stop the Movies
Can't Stop the Movies
27Apr/140

Kathryn Bigelow: The Hurt Locker (2008)

The Hurt Locker is one of the few perfect pieces of cinema to come out of America in the first decade of the new millennium.  It's a sum of Bigelow's career to-date, hitting the perfect zeitgeist of contemporary style and commentary, simultaneously looking like everything and feeling like nothing else out at the time.  The Hurt Locker's merits aren't in question but now, with more than six years passed, is it destined to linger or has its moment come and gone?  Andrew and Kyle both say it will be with us forever, but for very different reasons.

In some shit nowAndrewCommentaryBannerA funny thing happened to me when I got done watching The Hurt Locker again.  It's the same nerve-wracking "Dear God let me stop grinding my teeth" experience that I had the first time through.  But I had built myself up somewhat as this being the revelatory moment, the film that Bigelow made that finally freed her from comparisons to anyone else and separated her from the pack.

That was a bad thought.  Her appeal, so far, has been ingraining her films so completely in a sort of hyper-realized style of the moment.  We had Near Dark with its harsh lighting and grotesque special effects recalling the worlds of Michael Mann and John Carpenter.  Then Strange Days mixing the '90s tech crazed economic boom with other genre mixers like Quentin Tarantino and Oliver Stone.  Now The Hurt Locker, which on this watch through, has more than a passing resemblance to the "torture porn" era of films post-9/11 with an emphasis on an unseen foreign evil torturing our American characters through shaky cameras and inhospitable surroundings.

There's a lot I want to work through here, but how did you get through Camp Victory this time?

Kyle Commentary BannerI was hit a little less hard by the suspense and more impressed with her way of handling the personas and attitudes the war is cultivating in the characters—personas and attitudes that are often unpleasant and damaging at best, emerging in people who are still presented as generally "good." The "war is a drug" quote at the beginning of the movie pervaded every scene in a much stronger way for me this time around, perhaps  partly because the movie is slightly (very slightly) less culturally immediate now a couple of years down the road, but also because I felt a little more able to step back from the raw suspense this time around.

The great strength here for me isn't so much related to the movie as a breakthrough in Bigelow's career—though we should talk about why this was the case commercially—but as one of the first big mainstream movies of the current generation that managed to tackle an ongoing war with a complex, nuanced attitude toward our own troops' involvement in it. This isn't Redacted, trying to shock viewers into accepting American atrocities, and it's not Lone Survivor or Act of Valor pushing audiences to feel as if they're honoring troops by being witness to overblown action movie spectacle. It is, however, using many of the same slick, exciting film-making maneuvers of those sorts of movies and inserting really disturbing, often casual-seeming observations about how the war rewires people's attitudes and values.

In some sense I feel almost like the more important aspects of the movie get lost because they aren't hammered a little harder, but I credit Bigelow for using genre conventions—and we should definitely talk more about the gritty, shaky torture-porn elements you brought up—to make the movie seem less critical on the surface than it ends up being. That brings up the question again of why this was such a mainstream breakthrough for Bigelow—why do you think that was?

20Apr/140

Kathryn Bigelow: K-19: The Widowmaker (2002)

Kathryn Bigelow jumps from adapting novels to dramatizing history with K-19: The Widowmaker.  The film details two Soviet captains with opposing worldviews colliding over how to command a malfunctioning nuclear submarine during the height of the Cold War.  Andrew and Kyle find themselves at different ends of whether K-19 is an interesting film that is well-served in Bigelow's canon, or a capably assembled potboiler with Bigelow's genre blender dicing the results.

Maiden VoyageAndrewCommentaryBannerK-19: The Widowmaker has put me at an odd place this week.  One thing I hope you'll agree with, it's scads better than The Weight of Water, and there's a lot that I have to say about it.  But what puts my mind in a twist is that if I were watching this film for the first time, completely divorced from the rest of Kathryn Bigelow's filmography, I would have little to say about it outside of some positive notes about the lead performances and the occasional witty shot.  Putting it in Bigelow's canon almost subdues those accomplishments though, because with the attention to detail and criticism of national conflict as a measuring context make it clear how this is a dry run for The Hurt Locker in many ways.  I want to focus more on the former and less on the latter, but this makes me feel weird as I don't like damning with faint praise, and that's all I feel as though I can do in the context of this project.

Kyle Commentary BannerIt is much better than The Weight of Water, though I don't know if I have as much to say about it as you do. I was shocked to see when I sat down to watch it that it was over 2 hours long, because all I really remembered from seeing it long ago was that there is a lengthy sequence with sailors forced into dangerous radiation exposure. Having watched it last Friday, I still don't recall a lot more than that. Here it seems like Bigelow is held down by some tired conventions, making for a movie that falls into that "perfectly fine for what it is" category.

I like your idea of focusing on the "national conflict as a measuring context" idea though — let's go there first?

15Apr/140

Kathryn Bigelow: The Weight of Water (2000)

Five years after the ambitious and flawed Strange Days Kathryn Bigelow returned to the big screen with her first literary adaptation of The Weight of Water.  Kyle and Andrew struggle to find something good to say about this story of unhealthy desires told between people separated by a century.

The titular waterAndrewCommentaryBannerKyle, we've entered a lengthy period between films by Kathryn Bigelow.  Now, you said that you'd seen The Weight of Water before, and I'll be relying on you to pull something, anything, from this movie.  I hardly took any notes during it and looking at the last thing I wrote down, "Time-lapse photography of clouds," I hardly have anything to say other than it seems Bigelow came out of her five-year hiatus to make a slightly better budgeted episode of Masterpiece Theater.

Kyle Commentary BannerTo start, I'll address your first point—it was quite awhile ago when I saw this first, probably 10 years, but I did still remember a few things. For instance, Sean Penn is in it. Elizabeth Hurley, also in the movie. At one point, there is a boat. Also water.

Oddly enough, until the movie started, I did NOT remember that it cut back and forth between two stories in two centuries-apart time periods. When its first scenes opened set in the past, I thought I must have been mistaken and in fact hadn't seen the movie before—it turns out I just didn't remember half of it.

So here's the question that may help us get into why Bigelow would have wanted to make this movie, apparently an adaptation of a novel, where for all I care it could have stayed: Why have the two stories unfolding simultaneously? What is the audience supposed to get out of that, and where does it go wrong?

8Apr/140

Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones (2014)

SupapowerThe Paranormal Activity movies still have no reason to change the formula quite yet.  Comparatively speaking, Paranormal Activity: The Marked Ones is not a success, but on its own still made back seventeen times what it cost to make it.  That's an impressive return on any investment.  Too bad all of this money is going to the most creatively bankrupt and increasingly cynical series of films outside of the Marvel Universe.

Three times now I've made my distaste of the Paranormal Activity series known.  Found-footage horror, because it crams us so directly into the viewpoint of (typically) one person, requires a number of creative shocks or strong personalities to see its conceit through to the end.  The series has taken that to mean making sure its annoying main characters from the first film are crammed into the later chapters for forced continuity and maintaining the tired practice of limiting movement in the frame so that any disruption counts as a shock.  This is the same basic plot and scares repeated five times now with only a slight indication that it's slowing down.

The decline in inertia comes in this volume stood as good a chance as any to change the course of the series.  The Marked Ones was preceded by another storm of media quotes, talking about how it's going to focus on the barely tapped Latino market for film and will reinvent the formula with it's new setting and characters.  One choice phrase said that the market will be terribly appreciative about the 20% of the dialogue that's in Spanish.  I shouldn't be surprised, then, that the result does alter the Paranormal formula but not in any good ways, and certainly in no ways that shows this series will ever have respect for its target audience, even if it barely did to begin with.

4Apr/140

Kathryn Bigelow – Strange Days (1995)

Kathryn Bigelow, with Strange Days, puts her studio-backed creativity in a nauseous, sprawling, and pessimistic view of the future as technology, memory, and experience fuse into one.  It put off audiences then, and is due for a revisit now.

Cutting to the pointAndrewCommentaryBannerBuddy, before we go too in-depth on Strange Days, I have a question.  Which film do you think would have benefited more with tighter editing - Strange Days, or Quentin Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds?Kyle Commentary BannerI will go wholeheartedly with Strange Days on that one. This is a movie that, while I really like it, starts off with such promise that to see it veer into the various territories (and sometimes, seemingly, genres) that it eventually becomes muddled up in is a little disappointing. I don't begrudge Bigelow & co. the audacity to tackle a sprawling story, but I'd have liked to see one that maintained the ambition of the opening act and not branching off in so many unrestrained directions.