Oh Commies & Watermelons...

Stop Loss Trailer

The use of The Drowning Pool song in the beginning is flat-out retarded, but once the trailer stops with that song and the war footage, it gets better. It seems like a standard Oscar-bait movie, but there's something about it that actually makes me want to see it. Some of the dialogue is sort of sketchy, but it looks like it's going to be earnest, sincere, and not annoyingly preachy unlike other movies of it's kind. I'll probably check it out when it comes out.
*** out of ****
Charlie Wilson's War(dir. Mike Nichols)
This film thinks dressing up it's Congressman protagonist's lifestyle as rock star-ish makes for cutting satire. It doesn't have anything to say about our current political climate or about the one that the film takes place in. The film is a little too comfortable and proud of itself for it's own good given it's gung-ho let's kill some commie bastards attitude. It's similar to the The Kingdom except less offensive because it takes place during the Cold War instead of the current situation we're in right now. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is easily the best out of the principal actors, but Ned Beatty is the true standout in the picture mainly because he's one of the few actors along with Amy Adams to not deliver the lines in the smug "aren't I witty?" sort of way that the rest of the cast does. The only mildly thought-provoking aspect of the film is it's final title card before the credits roll. It's almost the equivalent of a decent punchline after a long drawn-out set-up. There are some laughs here and there, but overall, it was merely average.
** out of ****
The Wayward Cloud(dir. Tsai Ming-liang)
If I were to pick my favorite semi-recent director working today, I'd probably say Tsai or Hal Hartley so this review might not make for a great recommendation if you're not a fan of Tsai or even if you're just a mild one. It's easy to see how this film alienated audiences and critics alike especially with it's controversial finale and in a way, I sort of agree with them. Tsai is obviously not a big fan of pornography and if you read that finale as just a critique of porn's influence on individuals' conceptions of an erotic display of love, it starts to become too obvious, simplistic, and clunky, but I feel there's more at work here. This is probably the first Tsai film I've seen that seems specifically designed for interpretation since it's watermelons are used in such a way that they must mean something given the events in the narrative and how they almost have an influence on the flow of the film. Sure, Tsai used clocks in a similar way in What Time is It There?, but none of the clocks were utilized in such a way to hint that there was some underlining meaning to them outside of constantly reminding Hsiao-kang of his "love" that is spending time in Paris and maybe the time that he missed out on with her and his deceased father. Once Chen's watermelon falls to the ground and breaks, the tone of the film and Chen and Hsiao's relationship seems to change. My interpretation of the use of watermelons and the ending is fairly Catholic-minded, which might not make sense with a film directed by a Taiwanese Buddhist, but whatever. The watermelons are used in a similar way as the forbidden fruit in the Garden of Eden. When Chen gives Hsiao watermelon juice, he decides not to drink it, hinting that he wants to stay pure and not corrupted. Also, when Chen's watermelon falls and breaks on the ground, it's as if her innocence is shattering with it since after this event, she decides to watch one of the pornos that Hsiao "stars" in. These events lead to the finale that in my mind is simultaneously a sacrifice and washing away of one's sins. Hsiao's final act is thus an extremely perverse form of communion. I enjoy the film a lot because it provides food for thought, but it's disdain for pornography, while understandable, is sometimes too clumsy or obvious in it's totally unerotic sex scenes and especially with it's finale to make for an insightful argument against porn. The editing in this film is also some of the "fastest" I've ever seen in any of his films and it disrupts the beauty and rhythm in some of his better shots in this, making it especially frustrating and then there's the musical portions of the film that serve no purpose at all. I had similar feelings while watching The Hole, but once the ending rolled around in that film, they became absolutely necessary because they were used to set up for that wonderful ending, while the musical interludes in this are just there for what I assume is entertainment/amusement value and they don't deliver in that regard as well. One could easily call this film an artistic misstep, but it's still easily one of the most fascinating movies released this year.
*** out of ****