As a subcategory of the horror genre, the exorcism film does not have the best reputation. For every The Exorcist, there are a dozen Posessed’s and Beyond the Door’s. Yet, when done well, there is rarely something as profoundly [...]
It’s an exciting time for female comedy in Hollywood. In a genre traditionally dominated by men, films such as Bridesmaids are ushering in a new era of woman driven comedy, showing that women can not only be hilarious, but also raucous, disgusting, and lecherous. Bad Teacher hopes to revel in the comedy of female depravity, but instead teaches us that while F is for Funny, it isn’t a passing grade.
Bad Teacher follows Elizabeth Halsey (Cameron Diaz), a boozing, drug-using, man-abusing middle school teacher. Among a cast of passionate teachers, Elizabeth has other priorities. She wants money. A generous critic might assert that Elizabeth’s techniques for making money--namely, getting a breast enhancement surgery to ensnare a wealthy man--is a light commentary on American teachers’ low pay and unappreciated hard work. Most will see it as: an uninspired plot that gives Diaz the opportunity to swagger around, fake hangovers, and contort her face into various absurd expressions meant to indicate her disgust with the children and her role in their education.
Elizabeth’s disdain for the school and her profession is the primary punchline of the film, and Diaz falls short of bringing it humor. Elizabeth is meant to be despicable, but instead is mostly pathetic and mean-spirited. Given a few witty lines and a sharper tongue, the character might have at least carried an edge of discerning intelligence, and offered the audience some interest in her fate.
While the film may be titled Bad Teacher, it’s the good teachers of the cast that bring the real meat to the film. The Office’s Phyllis Smith plays a simpering and insecure teacher that befriends Elizabeth. Justin Timberlake, the wealthy substitute teacher that Elizabeth targets, plays a soft spoken man-child with a penchant for overly sunny responses and, in one scene, singing hilarious original songs.
Notably, Jason Segel delivers most of the film’s best lines in his role as a gym teacher that doggedly pursues Elizabeth. Segel says everything with an amused, wry tone, as if even he is surprised to be starring in this film. He is the only actor in the film that has chemistry with the children, as in one scene when he enters a heated Lebron vs. Jordan debate, and flaunts his sitcom laurels with an unlimited talent for banter. Unfortunately, he and Diaz have no romantic chemistry, and most of his jokes fall on the blank wall of her blinking smile. It is difficult to imagine the two of them making it through a full conversation, much less entering a romantic relationship.
Segel, Timberlake and Smith are just some of the ragtag collection of teachers that make up the “Jam Family”--the staff of Elizabeth’s school. As a group, they are the most appealing part of the film, mirroring the staff of any public school comfortably. For the most part, they are filtered through Elizabeth’s perception, which gives impression of a third person observer that presents the teachers as pitiful but ignorable entities that do little more than inconvenience Elizabeth’s life.
As a result, watching the movie feels like overhearing someone gossiping about a less fortunate friend, or worse, bullying a younger or weaker kid on the playground. Bad Teacher joins a disturbing trend in recent film--also evidenced in The Hangover, Due Date, and Get Him to the Greek--where culturally successful, good looking people take advantage of worse-off and, at times, developmentally disabled accomplices for the audience’s amusement. While Elizabeth might not end up with what she wanted at the end of the film, she certainly doesn’t pay for her various cruelties, and walks away with a worthwhile prize. Meanwhile, other characters in the film, guilty only of competition, or just suspicion, or unrequited lust, are vindictively and almost sadistically punished.
If Bad Teacher teaches us anything, it’s that the attractive and the manipulative not only end up on top, but they also get away with no comeuppance. Elizabeth’s worst lessons to her students are not the ones where she shows movies, or even the classes she sleeps through. They’re the lessons she teaches through example.
Bad Teacher follows Elizabeth Halsey (Cameron Diaz), a boozing, drug-using, man-abusing middle school teacher. Among a cast of passionate teachers, Elizabeth has other priorities. She wants money. A generous critic might assert that Elizabeth’s techniques for making money--namely, getting a breast enhancement surgery to ensnare a wealthy man--is a light commentary on American teachers’ low pay and unappreciated hard work. Most will see it as: an uninspired plot that gives Diaz the opportunity to swagger around, fake hangovers, and contort her face into various absurd expressions meant to indicate her disgust with the children and her role in their education.
Elizabeth’s disdain for the school and her profession is the primary punchline of the film, and Diaz falls short of bringing it humor. Elizabeth is meant to be despicable, but instead is mostly pathetic and mean-spirited. Given a few witty lines and a sharper tongue, the character might have at least carried an edge of discerning intelligence, and offered the audience some interest in her fate.
While the film may be titled Bad Teacher, it’s the good teachers of the cast that bring the real meat to the film. The Office’s Phyllis Smith plays a simpering and insecure teacher that befriends Elizabeth. Justin Timberlake, the wealthy substitute teacher that Elizabeth targets, plays a soft spoken man-child with a penchant for overly sunny responses and, in one scene, singing hilarious original songs.
Notably, Jason Segel delivers most of the film’s best lines in his role as a gym teacher that doggedly pursues Elizabeth. Segel says everything with an amused, wry tone, as if even he is surprised to be starring in this film. He is the only actor in the film that has chemistry with the children, as in one scene when he enters a heated Lebron vs. Jordan debate, and flaunts his sitcom laurels with an unlimited talent for banter. Unfortunately, he and Diaz have no romantic chemistry, and most of his jokes fall on the blank wall of her blinking smile. It is difficult to imagine the two of them making it through a full conversation, much less entering a romantic relationship.
As a result, watching the movie feels like overhearing someone gossiping about a less fortunate friend, or worse, bullying a younger or weaker kid on the playground. Bad Teacher joins a disturbing trend in recent film--also evidenced in The Hangover, Due Date, and Get Him to the Greek--where culturally successful, good looking people take advantage of worse-off and, at times, developmentally disabled accomplices for the audience’s amusement. While Elizabeth might not end up with what she wanted at the end of the film, she certainly doesn’t pay for her various cruelties, and walks away with a worthwhile prize. Meanwhile, other characters in the film, guilty only of competition, or just suspicion, or unrequited lust, are vindictively and almost sadistically punished.
If Bad Teacher teaches us anything, it’s that the attractive and the manipulative not only end up on top, but they also get away with no comeuppance. Elizabeth’s worst lessons to her students are not the ones where she shows movies, or even the classes she sleeps through. They’re the lessons she teaches through example.
I’ve heard this film described as “Bad Santa...with Cameron Diaz.” While raucously inappropriate comedies have always had a demographic, the success of films like The Hangover has extended the scope--where parents would never deign to watch American Pie, my father was laughing until he cried in Superbad. Bad Teacher follows Diaz’s Elizabeth, a teacher in Chicago that misbehaves to extraordinary measures in the classroom and tries to secure a wealthy husband in her office hours. While the plot may seem a bit insubstantial, I’m interested to see how Diaz performs. It’s easy to get hung up on her stumbles--Knight and Day, anyone?--but let’s not forget that Diaz has surprising range, as demonstrated in Being John Malkovich. Not to mention the Bridesmaids-sparked interest in funny women debasing themselves in traditionally male gross humor. If Justin Timberlake doesn’t drag the film down too much, my money’s on Diaz being a class act.
“My name is Conan O’Brien, and I may soon be available for children’s parties.”
When NBC decided to move the Tonight Show to 12:05 a.m., making it, technically the Tomorrow Show, it ensured a smaller viewership and the exit of its host, Conan O’Brien. O’Brien, who was legally forbidden from appearing on television for the following year, travelled the U.S. on a comedy tour titled the Legally Prohibited From Being Funny on Television Tour. The documentary Conan O’Brien Can’t Stop follows the comedian in the hilarious and, at times, harrowing journey. For those of us that missed the tour, the film is our chance to enjoy O'Brien's jokes, as well as take a peek at the O'Brien that stepped over the obstacles (nice to be so tall), and reclaimed his place among the television comedy royalty.
Lucky us, he went the tour documentary path. Some of the other things he was considering:
When NBC decided to move the Tonight Show to 12:05 a.m., making it, technically the Tomorrow Show, it ensured a smaller viewership and the exit of its host, Conan O’Brien. O’Brien, who was legally forbidden from appearing on television for the following year, travelled the U.S. on a comedy tour titled the Legally Prohibited From Being Funny on Television Tour. The documentary Conan O’Brien Can’t Stop follows the comedian in the hilarious and, at times, harrowing journey. For those of us that missed the tour, the film is our chance to enjoy O'Brien's jokes, as well as take a peek at the O'Brien that stepped over the obstacles (nice to be so tall), and reclaimed his place among the television comedy royalty.
Lucky us, he went the tour documentary path. Some of the other things he was considering:
“Televise my own colonoscopy on the Bravo channel on a show called Project Funway.”
“Star in a Lifetime movie about a woman trapped in an abusive relationship with her network.”
“Leave television altogether, and work in a classier business with better people, like hard core porn.”
Watch the Trailer:
If your favorite color is green, this is the movie for you.
It's true, the emerald hues are possibly the only thing Green Lantern has going for it. The film offers scene after scene of landscapes with aliens encased in their green lantern suits, and if you blur your eyes, they almost look like the grassy meadow you could have been enjoying instead of wasting two hours in a theater with Martin Campbell's newest film.
Green Lantern follows Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds), an ultra-talented pilot who discovers a dying alien and inherits a lantern, a ring, and the superpowers that come with them. The powers induct him into a universe-wide army of "lanterns" that fight against various forms of evil with the power of "will"--to materialize their every whim and imagining.
The "arrogant ass receives his calling and transforms into a benevolent superhero" is certainly not a new arc (see: Thor), but rarely has it been done so indelicately. Some of this is due to Reynold's particular skill in creating horribly unlikeable characters. Where his phoniness worked in Waiting, here every word he speaks seems heavily laced with dishonesty and a wormy sleaziness. This is not a guy you would trust with your daughter, much less with the fate of humanity. This quality isn't necessarily a bad fit for the initial character of Hal, but Reynolds indicates a severe lack of range as Hal's character supposedly stops with the narcissism and starts with the altruism.
The romance in the film, between Hal and the wannabe firecracker Carol (Blake Lively) also falls short. Lively is an ill-conceived choice for the role (for any role, really). She brings even less to the table than Reynolds, who at least garners some distaste. Lively's only act is insistence, and she plays out every line with the same desperate facial expression and whine in her voice. Their romance is supposed to follow an off again/on again formula with a woman who just can't quite let go of the bad boy with a heart o' gold that broke her own heart years ago. Throughout the film, we see Hal repeatedly demonstrate childish tendencies, like interrupting a dance to storm out of a bar with only a terse, "Thanks for the dance," to notify her of his departure. And yet, the allegedly intelligent, allegedly brave and aggressive Carol let's it all slip, like an insecure mother, only reprimanding Hal when he puts himself in danger.
This sense of danger is rarely present in the film. In a galaxy far away, a demonic presence named Paralax feeds off of fear and destroys complete civilizations. Evil! Yet, for reasons of either budget or plot, we are not given the opportunity to witness Paralax's true destructive power. The closest we get is seeing Hector (Peter Skaarsgard), a doctor who examines the fallen green lantern and becomes infected with Paralax's essence, as he becomes increasingly powerful. Skaarsgard, ever a treat, is noteworthy in the villain role, delivering a performance that is increasingly intriguing in comparison with the other story lines. He plays the doctor with a self satisfied simper, and his Hector, while ineffectual, is at least identifiable--which is more than we can say for the rest of the cast.
A weakness even greater than the plot is that of the CGI characters, making up probably 70% of the cast. The various aliens of bizarre inspiration (a green lantern bumble bee?) may have seemed like a good way to illustrate the vastness of the lanterns' power, but on screen they appear thin and badly realized. It is difficult to care about undeveloped characters that are not vaguely humanoid. Informing us that Paralax wiped out a nation of kittens or puppies would elicit far more interest and sympathy from the audience than learning of the unexplained civilizations he destroyed.
It's true, the emerald hues are possibly the only thing Green Lantern has going for it. The film offers scene after scene of landscapes with aliens encased in their green lantern suits, and if you blur your eyes, they almost look like the grassy meadow you could have been enjoying instead of wasting two hours in a theater with Martin Campbell's newest film.
Green Lantern follows Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds), an ultra-talented pilot who discovers a dying alien and inherits a lantern, a ring, and the superpowers that come with them. The powers induct him into a universe-wide army of "lanterns" that fight against various forms of evil with the power of "will"--to materialize their every whim and imagining.
The "arrogant ass receives his calling and transforms into a benevolent superhero" is certainly not a new arc (see: Thor), but rarely has it been done so indelicately. Some of this is due to Reynold's particular skill in creating horribly unlikeable characters. Where his phoniness worked in Waiting, here every word he speaks seems heavily laced with dishonesty and a wormy sleaziness. This is not a guy you would trust with your daughter, much less with the fate of humanity. This quality isn't necessarily a bad fit for the initial character of Hal, but Reynolds indicates a severe lack of range as Hal's character supposedly stops with the narcissism and starts with the altruism.
The romance in the film, between Hal and the wannabe firecracker Carol (Blake Lively) also falls short. Lively is an ill-conceived choice for the role (for any role, really). She brings even less to the table than Reynolds, who at least garners some distaste. Lively's only act is insistence, and she plays out every line with the same desperate facial expression and whine in her voice. Their romance is supposed to follow an off again/on again formula with a woman who just can't quite let go of the bad boy with a heart o' gold that broke her own heart years ago. Throughout the film, we see Hal repeatedly demonstrate childish tendencies, like interrupting a dance to storm out of a bar with only a terse, "Thanks for the dance," to notify her of his departure. And yet, the allegedly intelligent, allegedly brave and aggressive Carol let's it all slip, like an insecure mother, only reprimanding Hal when he puts himself in danger.
This sense of danger is rarely present in the film. In a galaxy far away, a demonic presence named Paralax feeds off of fear and destroys complete civilizations. Evil! Yet, for reasons of either budget or plot, we are not given the opportunity to witness Paralax's true destructive power. The closest we get is seeing Hector (Peter Skaarsgard), a doctor who examines the fallen green lantern and becomes infected with Paralax's essence, as he becomes increasingly powerful. Skaarsgard, ever a treat, is noteworthy in the villain role, delivering a performance that is increasingly intriguing in comparison with the other story lines. He plays the doctor with a self satisfied simper, and his Hector, while ineffectual, is at least identifiable--which is more than we can say for the rest of the cast.
A weakness even greater than the plot is that of the CGI characters, making up probably 70% of the cast. The various aliens of bizarre inspiration (a green lantern bumble bee?) may have seemed like a good way to illustrate the vastness of the lanterns' power, but on screen they appear thin and badly realized. It is difficult to care about undeveloped characters that are not vaguely humanoid. Informing us that Paralax wiped out a nation of kittens or puppies would elicit far more interest and sympathy from the audience than learning of the unexplained civilizations he destroyed.
In the end, the movie mostly makes a strong point about willpower. As Hal struggles to find the will to commit to a woman, to overcome his daddy issues, and imagine a universe free of evil, the real question is: do you have the will to stay through the whole thing? Because I almost didn't. For people who like: The Lost World: Jurassic Park II, Ghost Rider
With a tagline that reads, “Eat, Drink, and Try Not to Kill Each Other,” this movie already promises amusement. Originally a largely improvised BBC series, The Trip follows Steve Coogan as a food critic that is sent on a tour of the finest restaurants of England. Coogan, whose relationship falls apart just prior to departure on his tour, decides to bring a friend: Rob Brydon, who Coogan describes as “a short Welshman who does impressions.” If you can’t make it to the film, take the time to watch the trailer, which showcases a few hilarious impressions (Michael Caine!) as well as a glimpse of the sort of wry wit you can expect from a BBC comedy. Not to mention shots of some pretty nice food. And here everyone says England doesn’t have good eats.
Nothing about The Art of Getting By looks particularly new or fresh, but the package looks pretty charming. A teenage artist with a case of the cursed delinquency (Freddie Highmore) develops a close friendship with a girl from his school (Emma Roberts) and has to figure out...something in order to make her more than a friend and get his life in order. While it will be an adjustment to see the purposeful little boy from Finding Neverland as a brooding and rebellious teen, it’s nice to see a high school kid actually played by a high school kid. Now we’ll just have to see if newcomer writer/director Gavin Wiesen has anything new to say about an old story.
Jim Carrey’s up to his old tricks again in Mr. Popper’s Penguins, and I mean old. The plot of the movie is apparently: a man playfully battles a humorous penguin infestation. The penguins turn his apartment into something that resembles the icy habitats in the zoo, all while doing charming things like performing choreographed dances. While the plot devices might be old, make sure you’re taking someone young to see this movie. My biggest question is, why not a kitten infestation? Now that’s a movie and a reality I would like to see.
Walking into Super 8, viewers had little preparation. The trailers were tightlipped on details and showed only snippets of action sequences. A group of children making an amateur film accidentally catch a train crash of epic proportions on camera. There’s an alien in the train. There’s trouble.The actual plot of the film doesn’t elaborate much further than the suppositions garnered by the trailers. After witnessing the train crash--potentially one of the most awesome disaster sequences in a movie with exploding cars, tumbling debris, and teeth grating sound effects--Joe (charming newcomer Joel Courtney) and his ragtag group of would-be filmmakers keep their crash footage a secret and attempt to finish their movie on a backdrop of chaos and conspiracy as the military moves in to deal with the ramifications of the crash.
Writer/director J.J. Abrams captures his own nostalgia for childhood wonder and daring creativity. The cast of children is impeccable, with the bossy director Charles (Riley Griffiths) and Joe’s crush, Alice (Elle Fanning). Fanning plays her part with impressive poise, cool with brief bouts of emotion that juxtapose beautifully with the timid earnestness of Courtney’s Joe.
 |
| Elle Fanning shines as Alice. |
The dialogue is rich with childish jokes that make even the most mature in the audience chuckle, like when Cary (Ryan Lee), requests more fries “because my friend is a fatass.” Abrams is aware of the tendency of children to indulge in profanity, and every time Lee or one of the others says “shit” it is with the relish and glee that most can recall from childhood.
As a film about children, certainly Super 8 can be ranked (and already has been by many journalists and critics) with The Goonies or Stand By Me. But Super 8 is not just a children’s movie, and unfortunately, this is where the film starts to derail.
According to Abrams, the film originated as two different projects, then came together under the observance of Steven Spielberg, and the line dividing them is painfully obvious in the film. Aside from the train crash, the first three quarters of the film have the children and alien action completely segregated. This changes upon the big and painfully obvious reveal, and a conclusion that is both clunky and tired. Abrams, not necessarily one for complete subtlety but ever a master of finesse, seems dragged down by Spielberg’s influence, as most of the film’s scenes seem like they could have been clipped from Spielberg’s oeuvre--E.T., Jurassic Park, etc. Most disappointing is the lack of creativity in the concept, as Abrams is generally boiling over with some masterful idea that permits lapses in judgement on character or pacing.
Notably, the film falls prey to marketing. Abrams himself played a large role in maintaining the secrecy surrounding the film and its components. The implication of such reticence on a project is that there is something big to reveal, some hidden discovery that is worth hiding. To discover that all of the caution tape and the confidential stamps are to mask a retelling of The Iron Giant is to feel duped, or misled into anticipation of something greater, more exciting.
Add to this that Abrams creates for himself a sticky situation by inserting a cast of children into a film starring a seemingly vicious alien. Anyone that has spent time in American movie theaters knows about the existing taboo in Hollywood about killing or injuring child characters. As a result, as the kids plunge from one dangerous situation to another, dodging alien attacks, tank fire and explosions, there is not a moment of suspense or adrenaline. We know they’ll be fine. We know there’s no danger at all. As far as danger goes, they might as well be frolicking in a meadow with a unicorn.
Certainly, lovers of Super 8 will combat such critiques by pointing out that Abrams, when describing the film to the LA Times, doesn’t describe it as a monster movie but rather as being “about overcoming loss and finding your way again and finding your own voice.” There are certainly hints of this here, but the film spends too much time on Joe’s lackluster father, Jackson Lamb (Kyle Chandler) who serves little purpose in the film except to punctuate scenes with the children. Lamb’s scenes regarding the loss of his wife end up feeling thin and superficial, and seem more like a distraction from the action and emotional progress of the film rather than a driving force.
While nostalgia goes a long way in powering a film, it’s not enough. Super 8 is a powerhouse of childhood longing and top of the line individual components, but while the sum of its parts might add up to a super 8, the whole was more like a super 6.5.
Good for people who liked: The Goonies, Iron Giant, E.T.
“What are stories but mystery boxes?” J.J. Abrams asked in his TED talk in 2007. The term “Mystery Box” comes from a purchase he made as a child, a box of magic supplies he still has not opened. Why not? He explains that the box, closed, “represents infinite possibility, represents hope, represents potential.” This concept of infinite possibility, closed inside a box that we can choose to open or not, is a recurring theme of his work. “Mystery is the catalyst for imagination,” he said. He will never open the box.
The mystery boxes of Lost function not only as narrative tools, but also as doorways to extraordinary potential. In a scene in season 3, Benjamin Linus (Michael Emerson) says to John Locke (Terry O’Quinn):
Ben: Picture a box. You know something about boxes don't you John? What if I
told you that somewhere on this island there's a very large box and whatever
This, Abrams recognizes, is the essence of story and imagination. The experience of storytelling is the gateway to what Abrams labels as “infinite possibility.”
Looking forward to Super 8, out today, we can see his concepts at work. The plot, heavily shrouded in mystery and barely hinted at in the teaser trailer, follows a group of children who capture a train crash and, presumably, alien event with their handheld camera.
Here, Abrams goes beyond the second hand experience of opening the mystery box through walking into the movie theater. Super 8 explores the greatest source of “infinite possibility”--the act of creation, the act of opening the mystery box that contains the human mind and the source of creativity. In this, the use of the pen, the paintbrush, the clay, and the lens are all methods to open the mystery box. As the children of the film peer through their Super 8 lens, they open the door to imagination, to “infinite possibility” and to the darkness that lies beyond the “outside the mystery box” style of thinking.
What then, should we expect walking into Super 8 tomorrow? Abrams’ TED talk speaks to the sense of childhood wonder he felt as his grandfather showed him the interworkings of electronics, or tricks of illusion. There seems to be plenty of this present from the glimpses we’ve caught from the somewhat reticent trailer.
What Abrams does not discuss at TED is his obvious awareness of the infinite potential not just for wonder but also for darkness when one opens a mystery box. Mystery, he says, is more powerful than knowledge. What the children witness through the lens of their camera is due to be more powerful and terrifying than anything concrete they might experience in the rational world.
As with most artists, Abrams’ thesis is probably ever changing and more layered with each work he produces. One thing’s for sure--we’ll keep opening his mystery boxes and diving in as long as he puts them in front of us. Starting with Super 8.
See the TED talk here:
you imagined, whatever you wanted to be in it, when you opened that box,
there it would be.
This, Abrams recognizes, is the essence of story and imagination. The experience of storytelling is the gateway to what Abrams labels as “infinite possibility.”
Looking forward to Super 8, out today, we can see his concepts at work. The plot, heavily shrouded in mystery and barely hinted at in the teaser trailer, follows a group of children who capture a train crash and, presumably, alien event with their handheld camera.
Here, Abrams goes beyond the second hand experience of opening the mystery box through walking into the movie theater. Super 8 explores the greatest source of “infinite possibility”--the act of creation, the act of opening the mystery box that contains the human mind and the source of creativity. In this, the use of the pen, the paintbrush, the clay, and the lens are all methods to open the mystery box. As the children of the film peer through their Super 8 lens, they open the door to imagination, to “infinite possibility” and to the darkness that lies beyond the “outside the mystery box” style of thinking.
 |
| J.J. Abrams on the set of Super 8 |
What Abrams does not discuss at TED is his obvious awareness of the infinite potential not just for wonder but also for darkness when one opens a mystery box. Mystery, he says, is more powerful than knowledge. What the children witness through the lens of their camera is due to be more powerful and terrifying than anything concrete they might experience in the rational world.
As with most artists, Abrams’ thesis is probably ever changing and more layered with each work he produces. One thing’s for sure--we’ll keep opening his mystery boxes and diving in as long as he puts them in front of us. Starting with Super 8.
See the TED talk here:
Is there really anyone that is not going to see this on Friday? A group of kids making amateur films with a Super 8 camera capture a train crash and its subsequent supernatural consequences on film. J.J. Abrams developed the concept as a combination of his childhood love of filmmaking (with his very own Super 8 camera--can’t you just see that on the shelf in his Sarah Lawrence dorm room?) and affection for large-scale monster movies (see: Cloverfield). Add epic-master Steven Spielberg (see: Transformers) to the mix and you’ve got a recipe for one hell of a monster flick. But don’t jump to conclusions on genre--with Abrams, nothing should be taken at face value, and the monsters are just as often psychological as they are physical.
Do you live in New York or Los Angeles? Lucky you, because Trollhunter is going to be playing in your city on its limited release. The horror flick combines a Blair Witch formula with an unconventional evil: TROLLS! And yes, while the trolls do appear enough like Where the Wild Things Are muppets that I half expect them to end up talking about their relationships, this film was made by Norwegians. Which is basically genius assurance. For those of you that haven’t seen the trailer, please do:
This gem of an indie flick casts Ewan McGregor as Oliver, a forlorn, lonely sort as he deals with the everyday problems: falling in love, losing family, having your father come out of the closet after 45 years of marriage, and a talking dog. Christopher Plummer and Melanie Laurent (who hasn’t been waiting to see her again after Inglourious Basterds) costar. I have it on good authority that this film is a must-see.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
