Lost is Back!

Finally!  So glad it’s back. Mr. Eko, we hardly knew ya.  What a fascinating background – and how amazing is it that the Beechcraft plane was flying drugs for him from Nigeria, and that he himself was supposed to be on it?  And that he found his brother’s body inside the plane??  And that he became a “priest” by accident – but when Charlie asked him, “Are you a priest or not?”, he put on the cross and said, “Yes, I am a priest.”  

He and Locke are so amazing – men of faith.  My friend Amy thinks that they are the black and white opponents that Locke was talking about way back when he introduced Walt to backgammon.  But they are so similar…although now we know that Mr. Eko has done horrible things in his past.

So much ground to cover…Charlie is such a jerk for lying to Claire, and such a loser for stashing those Virgin Mary statues.  Methinks I see a downward spiral coming.

Chemistry between Hurley and Libby?  A much-need haircut for Sawyer, although it looks like what he really needs is a shower – and now they have one in the hatch!  How nice was that when Jin and Sun brought fish to Ana Lucia.  

And Michael, learning how to shoot from Locke, because Locke thought he was lurking in the hatch to try to get a gun.  But in truth, he was trying to get on the computer so he could communicate with “Walt.”  It seems pretty clear that the person he is really talking to is one of the others.  And it looks like next week’s episode will be another edge-of-the-seat ride!

Match Point

Brr!!  Baby, it’s cold in this movie!  Sheesh.  None of the characters are even remotely warm-blooded.  This chilling type of film is certainly a departure for Woody Allen, and it’s getting him a lot of positive attention, but it’s hard to enjoy a film where you root for no one, and where your main character leaves you ice cold.

The movie starts out well enough, and has the usual Woody Allen angle of smart, cultured people having interesting, if slightly esoteric, conversations.  His new setting of London, as opposed to New York, seems to really suit him.  And it has a chilliness to it that suits the entire mood of the film, as well.

The story itself, other than the third act, is fairly standard fare.  Boy meets girl, girl has money so boy marries her, boy meets a different girl, cheating ensues, etc.  Been there, seen it a million times.  This film has a violent twist to it that changes things up a bit, but the tone of it becomes awkward, almost comedic, in a way that doesn’t seem to really fit.  Chris, played by Jonathan Rhys-Meyers, is such a smooth, snakelike operator in everything that he does, his initial bungling of his evil plan is foolish.  And the tone of the film from there becomes even more odd, with the introduction of a pair of goofy cops who wisecrack their way through a dead-end investigation.  Also, by the latter minutes of the film, the audience dislikes Chris so intensely and is left feeling so cold about the whole thing, it’s hard to feel anything good.

Another point is that Scarlett Johansson and Rhys-Meyers are both such deadpan actors, with monotone voices and barely a flicker of emotion in their eyes, that it’s hard to understand what they’re feeling, or to relate to them in any sympathetic way.  

I’m going home to put on a sweater…

Munich and Syriana

Seeing Munich and Syriana within two days of each other required a lot of heavy lifting.  Both films present complex storylines about characters with shifting loyalties and conflicting motivations.  Syriana was written and directed by the writer of Traffic, and if you saw that, you’ll recognize the similarities – an interconnectedness between characters and plot that is slowly and intricately revealed.  George Clooney was outstanding, as was the entire cast – many familiar faces in parts both big and small.  I’m glad Clooney is receiving a lot of awards and nominations, but I’m puzzled as to why it’s as a supporting actor.  He’s billed at the top, and if he’s not the star, I don’t know who is.  To be fair, all the actors are basically in supporting roles, as there is no one main story – and no one person who is either completely a hero or a villain.

Similarly, Munich deals with characters who live in a gray area – and struggle to define themselves as “the good guys.”  Following the murder of Israeli athletes during the Munich Olympics, the Israeli government sent secret teams of assassins after those they felt were responsible.  Eric Bana plays the leader of one such team, and the film takes us through their pursuit of various targets. Each assassination plays out in an atmosphere of unbelievable tension for both the characters and the audience.  Spielberg has woven an extremely tight, taut thriller.  Eric Bana’s character struggles with the emotional and moral impact of his actions, being both uncomfortable with the role of a killer, and haunted by the deaths of the innocent Olympians.  It’s a great portrait and a fascinating story.

Gilmore Girls is Back!

Good GG last night!  Good stuff all around.  I thought Scott Patterson did an exceptional job with his storyline.  I loved it when he and Kirk were walking around town trying to find a wireless connection – so that Luke could look at his daughter’s web site. And I loved Lane being back with her mom and yelling at customers in the antique shop and then the two of them bonding at the end.
 
I could have done without Logan, but I guess since he's still in the opening credits...I loved Paris, of course, and so glad to see Doyle.  Their self-defense exercise was hilarious!  Although I have to wonder why their apartment is so slummy, since they first moved into it in the summer before Paris found out she didn't have any money. Unless we're supposed to think that they moved to this place afterwards.
 
Not sure I loved Lorelai’s dress…I don’t know why it had that odd sash on it.  And I think a slightly different shade would have been better on her.  But she did look pretty when she came down the stairs to show it to Luke.  Poor Luke.

I just wish they hadn't given away the "reveal" of Luke's daughter to Lorelai during the preview for next week. It would have been better to remain in suspense on that!
 

Brokeback Mountain

I’m a horrible person who has not blogged in a long time, and should be taken out back and shot.  In the interests of turning over a new leaf, I am here to render a few brief comments on Brokeback Mountain.

I found this to be a beautifully shot and acted film that evoked one of the most painfully sad love stories I think I’ve ever seen.  It was more romantic and loving than most depictions of heterosexual love onscreen, by a long shot.  

I wonder – I’ve told some skeptical people that it’s just a love story, plain and simple – like any other.  But am I being (unintentionally) bigoted when I say that?  It’s not just a love story like any other, because it’s about the specific circumstances of being gay in a closed-minded community, and the pain these men must endure because they love each other but cannot make a life together.  

It is definitely a beautiful, sad, unique film, and one that deserves to be seen by many people – especially those who are least likely to go.

Note: I’m glad that Heath Ledger is getting awards and nominations, but I feel that Jake Gyllenhal deserves kudos too.  Happy that he just got a SAG award nomination.