In Contention

Author: Kristopher Tapley

  • REVIEW: “A History of Violence” (***1/2)

    A History of Violence“A History of Violence” is going to be David Cronenberg’s crowning glory. It’s the film that has something to say about every cinematic endeavor in his lengthy portfolio. It’s the film that time will remember him by.

    Based on a gritty graphic novel by John Wagner, the film is a commentary on the nature of violence, the mechanics of its simplicity and the mechanics of its complicity. It’s an account of the effect violence has on a household, on a town, on many different psyches. It’s one of the smartest subtextual films of the year, yet the subtext seems obvious. But it’s not.

    “A History of Violence” is a very intricate film.

    The fascination is that to be so meticulous in its thematics, the story is relayed in a very elementary fashion. No fancy tricks, no overwrought hand-to-mouth relay – just basic, almost painfully simple storytelling. I would say that not only is it Cronenberg’s most accessible film, but it is potentially his most disturbing. And, obviously, that is saying a LOT.

    The events take place in Millbrook, a picturesque small-town setting that stands almost archetypal in the midst of an upcoming storm. The storm comes in the form of two mass murderers waltzing into Tom Stall’s (Viggo Mortensen) downtown diner with evil intentions. After handily disposing of the would-be murderer/rapists, Stall is catapulted into the limelight as an unassuming hero. He soon finds himself at the whims of Philadelphia mobster Carl Fogaty (Ed Harris) and his band of cronies, expressing a vested interest in this small town savior.

    The violence in the film is extensive and at times outrageous, though it retains a level of creativity and relevance that keeps it from becoming gratuitous – shockingly. The gore is stomach-turning, to be sure, but vital to the components of the story Cronenberg is telling. Ultimately, it’s all seemingly a justification for the career he has made in the splatter business, as if it’s all been a long, slow ride to this moment, this declaration, this brand of insightful commentary.

    Furthermore, the film boasts one of the most organic ensemble performances of the year.

    (from left) Maria Bello and Viggo Mortensen in A History of ViolenceMortensen portrays Stall with a particular ease. Rather he inhabits him, giving the kind of performance that true acting is all about. At the same time, it’s the sort of work that gets ignored during awards season in favor of showier turns.

    Ed Harris springs onto the screen as the creepy Fogaty, and I have to say he sculpts the character off the page better than any other actor could have managed. On paper, Fogaty is assuredly a device if anything. Harris breathes him in and out and terrifies accordingly, though I must admit it’s missing a certain something to be considered formidable in the Oscar ring.

    William Hurt’s five minute cameo is one of the best pieces of work this year, a barrel of laughs and yet a swift study in acting perfection. Yes, perfection.

    But the real stand-out is Maria Bello. Bello was passed over by the Academy for a notice in 2003 for her multi-lauded performance in The Cooler, but I don’t expect that to be the case this year. If “A History of Violence” has any real shot at Oscar recognition, it is for her explosive performance. This is fire-breathing, gut-wrenching, head-spinning work. The layers that would be considered missing in a film like this, one that could easily be labeled “surface,” she adds them…in spades.

    A final note, “A History of Violence” also has something to say about passion. I’m not afraid to say that I haven’t quite put my finger on it yet, but it has something to do with two raunchy sex scenes that manage to remain out of the realm of gratuitous – much like the violence – as well as the motivations behind the character of Stall and why he is where he is at the film’s open. There is most definitely a point being made about desire, vehemence and conviction. It’s lurking – much like the film.

    I can’t wait to see this again.

  • SHORT TAKE: “Corpse Bride” (***1/2)

    Tim Burton's Corpse BrideI saw Tim Burton’s “Corpse Bride” in Westwood tonight, and it’s one of the most enjoyable films of the year. Recalling strands of “Beetlejuice” and “The Nightmare Before Christmas,” the film’s witty screenplay combines with a bombastic Danny Elfman score and a heightened level of production value to make for Burton’s best endeavor of any sort since 1999’s Sleepy Hollow, and perhaps since 1994’s Ed Wood.

    The film tells the story of Victor and Victoria (voiced by Johnny Depp and Emily Watson respectfully) and the deceased bride-to-be (Tim Burton’s own bride, Helena Bonham Carter) that comes between them and their arranged marriage.

    Burton draws upon his cast of collaborators for a who’s who of voice talent. Amongst the contributors are Albert Finney, Christopher Lee, Michael Gough, and Elfman, with Tracy Ullman and Joann Lumley to boot.

    (more…)

  • SHORT TAKE: “The Family Stone” (***1/2)

    Fox Searchlight Pictures\' The Family StoneThomas Bezucha’s “The Family Stone” is as refreshingly scripted as one can hope for. His film has magnificent ideas. His characters are thoroughly crafted with a richness unbecoming of the current cinema. His tale brings with it a warmth and a spirit that permeates like the finest emotional experience.

    It should be noted that the film I saw is not in its finalized form. There are touches to be made, score to be filled in, a number of variables to add to the mixture. But in the current state, “The Family Stone” is still something to behold.

    As for performances, you’ll hear many things about Diane Keaton to be sure. Her earthy motherly portrayal is a sincere portrait from an actress at the top of her game yet again. Sarah Jessica Parker sports a showy turn that will leave audiences in stitches. Luke Wilson offers up a chuckler per minute he’s on screen. Rachel McAdams stays on course for assured stardom. Dermot Mulroney keeps an even keel and Claire Danes pops in for a touching if understated, and perhaps under-written, spell.

    But Craig T. Nelson steals my heart, supporting as the father figure that bleeds a warmth you can’t stand to be away from. It’s my favorite performance of the year, and it will likely remain under the radar.

    I won’t yet fully handicap the film’s Oscar potential. We need to see where it goes upon release, though I expect this one to find a significant holiday audience. Speculation for Keaton is warranted, but I’m looking five other directions at the moment.

    Parker’s sparkling irritant could make a play if her category weren’t stuffed to the gills. And Nelson would be a personal hopeful, of course. All things considered I think the writers’ branch ought to see the sure-handedness Bezucha displays in his sophomore effort. If not for Oscar then perhaps his guild can come through, because writing of this caliber deserves distinction.

  • SHORT TAKE: “Grizzly Man” (**1/2)

    Grizzly ManWerner Herzog’s “Grizzly Man” is an amazingly rich film, and an indefinably important one for those who have a vested interest in artistic showcases of man’s position in his natural world.

    That Herzog, a madman in his own right, would be drawn to the life and times of Timothy Treadwell is hardly surprising, but what did catch me off guard watching the film was how much Herzog, even given the controller that he is, allowed the seams of his staging and the melodrama of his subjects to come across on film.

    I don’t really want to dig too deep into the film. Treadwell was a madman, but a beautiful man. And Herzog, a cinematic genius, found a fascination in his fellow filmmaker’s exploits. Hearing Herzog’s view of his basis for nature’s common denominator (chaos) bouncing off of his subject’s basis (balance) was an exercise in exemplary cinema where filmic essays are concerned. But what really bothered me was how out of control the director let his obviously theatrical (in personality) interviewees get.

    (more…)

  • Not a moment too soon

    Welcome to In Contention.

    Oscar season is breathing down our necks yet again and here I am, finally in Los Angeles, and not a peep out of me yet.

    I had planned on ducking out of the Oscar race entirely this season for various reasons, but recent activity has caused me to dip my pen back into the awards prognostication ink.

    In Contention will be your one-stop spot for thorough, un-adulterated and above all, objective film awards and Oscar analysis throughout the season, in addition to various film and industry commentary here and there and in between.

    That’s right. I’m back.

    Thanks to Sasha Stone at Oscarwatch for the leg up.

    Starting Monday, August 22, In Contention begins analysis of every category beginning with Best Picture.