"Fringe" Review: "One Night in October" (***1/2)

I'll be honest in saying that last week's episode didn't exactly rock me to my core as much as I hoped. I believe it has most to do with that central absence of Joshua Jackson, and much as I love Seth Gable, he doesn't quite fill that space in our hearts. Nor is he meant to. Across the seasons, Peter has always seemed like the odd one out. Walter and Olivia are clearly so much more interesting, lets just get rid of Peter. But now that he's gone, we really miss him. He had this charisma and endearment that just burrowed into the fabric of the show. How does it work without him. Begrudgingly and cynically, and this week's episode puts that pretty delicately.

Case of the week? Yeah, but with a twist we haven't really done before. The alternate universe has asked for Olivia's assistance in a serial killer case, escorting the serial killer's doppelganger from over here, a professor, over to glean information from the killer's home. There's immediately this sort of intrigue about Olivia and Altlivia working with one another, and a mutual frustration between the two. Admittedly, Altlivia is a lot more nonchalant about the ordeal, because what does she really have against the other Olivia? She's something of a competitor, and that's how she really sees it.

Olivia, in the meantime, has so many deep issues with Altlivia. It's not just the fact that the woman stole her life, but she realized that her life in the alternate universe, for the most part, has been so much better. She's happy, cheerful, and honestly possessing of a freedom that our Olivia doesn't have. Altlivia is what Olivia would have ended up as if her life had gone as she hoped it would. This may be stating what's been obvious all along, but it's so much more prevalent when the two of them are in a scene together.

"Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close" Trailer

And so we have the inevitable Oscar vehicle from Stephen Daldry, who is woefully known as a contender for nearly every film he releases. He has no acknowledgeable voice in his direction, and his latest film seems like a tedious exercise in such. Curiously taking on the exact same plot as "Hugo", replacing 1920s Europe with 9/11, this looks like the feel good WTC film of the year. There is no effort made to capture the tragedy of it, aside from the fact that Tom Hanks is dead. That's pretty much it.

For Your Anticipation: I'm Gonna Throw Up

I don't think many would have pegged this as one of the top films coming out this month, but it's been a really sad and depressing year for comedies. There's a bit of irony in that the one with most depressing subject matter has the most potential. Honestly, I keep hearing about people getting illogically excited for "What's Your Number?" and I'm wondering why that energy isn't being pointed towards "50/50". This isn't an insensitive sort of film, and there's some kind of honesty going on here. It's based on the writer and Seth Rogen's experience of this. There's got to be some honesty in the pot.

For Your Anticipation: Not a Word

If I've sounded a bit dismissive of "Take Shelter" in the past, it's not been by intention. I barely knew it was coming this month, and it hasn't been at the top of my mind. It seems, forgive me, somewhat simple. Man has dreams of storms, invests too much money into building a tornado shelter, and starts to lose his mind. Spooky stuff, and I don't mean that as a joke. This is how a decent thriller should be made, with motivating performances as well. Michael Shannon and Jessica Chastain both look to be in great form here. I'd be interested to see it if it comes around anytime soon. Still, I'm not rushing out for it.

2 Years of 'High on Celluloid'!

It's kind of hard to think that I've only been working on this site for two years, but at a point it seems like time becomes a less solid thing. I map things out by experience, and I am still very dissatisfied with my work in my entire first year. It was mostly based on these minimalist and isolationist ramblings of somebody who hadn't lived, and therefore didn't have an opinion. I think that the film that really begged me to be more individual and self-assured in my dissent from the popular opinion was "Black Swan", which was oddly absorbed by the popular opinion. Society's sensual obsession with it seemed to minimalize the accomplishment.

If you brought it up to any average person who liked it, they'll say that Natalie Portman's performance is the film. Those who disliked it will narrow it down to being an average thriller. Both miss the point of the film entirely, and I kept reaching these emotional roadblocks in others' responses, and I simply balked at it. It suddenly became so apparent how flawed the public opinion is, which was further compounded by "The King's Speech" winning Best Picture at this year's Oscar race. I thought of the film's true merits, which were few, and it got me to scrutinize the other players in the race, and finding I wasn't as taken with "Toy Story 3", "The Social Network", or "True Grit" as I thought.

I owe some of that sudden change to my film professors, who've done an absolutely brilliant job of broadening my horizon, if feeding my ego a tad too much inadvertently. I owe a great deal more to "Black Swan", as those central themes of railing against your owners in defense of what you believe just ignited inside me. Realize that I gave 17 A-range reviews last year, and only four so far this year, two of which in the past two weeks. I raised my standards to what they should be, rather than settling for less. If I operated this year the way I did in 2010, I think I'd have lost more readers than I'd have gained. The readers I have now are at least more specific.

Films to See in 2011: October

It's strange that September may indeed end up the highlight of my motion picture autumn, as October slows things down a considerable bit with stale comedy, Oscar bait, and amateur horror. That may be a degenerative statement, but it's a highly degenerative month. Last year kicked the month off with "The Social Network" and "Let Me In", which are both equally good films, though perhaps not as great as imagined. This year it's George Clooney's Academy hopeful "The Ides of March", crashing metal hybrid between kids flick and fight film "Real Steel", and off-path indie comedy "Dirty Girl". Which of those catches my interest best? Oddly enough "Dirty Girl". It has one more Juno Temple than its competitors.

Then there's the obvious mixture of pathetic horror-remake "The Thing", pathetic not-really-a-musical remake "Footloose", and whatever the hell "The Big Year" is supposed to be. "The Skin I Live In" is opening in limited release, but my interest in that one is rather restrained. "Paranormal Activity 3" and "The Three Musketeers" follow, pushing me deeper into my own hole that weekend. And then things pick up considerably in that last weekend of the month. Disregarding "Johnny English" of course.

"Anonymous" has gotten some strong buzz out of Toronto, though don't expect me to invest a second of my time in that. Nothing against director Roland Emmerich, but I'm just not that interested in a Victorian era dramatic piece one week after "The Three Musketeers" comes out. And in limited release there are two films that everyone has more vested interest in than myself. "Like Crazy" got a ton of buzz out of Sundance, but it just looks like an illogical romantic story with a simple solution. And I just don't entirely see the point of "The Rum Diary". Given what films are left out of this recap, it may be all too easy to guess my most anticipated three. That comes either way, so take a look after the jump!

For Your Anticipation: Overbearing Creepy Music

I'm not sure Jim Sheridan is the type of man you'd expect to take on this sort of overtly creepy sort of haunted house flick. BUT "Dream House" is a twist on that, because it's also a psychological drama. Combine the two, and you get, something. I'm going to be honest. I'm not interested in this beyond Daniel Craig. The man just can't get a break these days. Besides that, there are other things I have more of a priority to write about.

For Your Anticipation: So Many People

And now we have an assemblage of some fine comedic actors in a film that entirely wastes them. I am not at all talking about Anna Faris. I'm talking about the dozens of people she's apparently dated, and it didn't work out. It's pretty clear there's a reason why they didn't work out. It's pretty clear Chris Evans is going to end up with her. It feels like a chore writing about it. I'm not going to suggest "What's Your Number?".

Film Review: "A Dangerous Method" (**1/2)

"Do you think they know we're on our way, bringing them the plague?"

I doubt a film so irritatively dividing of me has come along thus far this year. That much I can say with confidence about David Cronenberg's "A Dangerous Method". Across the film's generous runtime, questions of sexuality, psychology (obviously), emotion, compromise, family, and repression are brought up by the script, but oddly enough not by the film itself. By "the film" I speak of Cronenberg, whose work here is more to draw attention to the film than embellish anything about it. A line like the one above should just be one a group that stick out, but it's the only moment in the film in which you wish for something a bit more incendiary than what we received.

"A Dangerous Method" follows Michael Fassbender as Carl Jung, a budding psychologist following in the steps of Sigmund Freud, portrayed here by the more recently unseen Viggo Mortensen. Jung's passion is lit by prominent patient Sabrina Spielrein, with Keira Knightly literally screaming onto the scene. It puts things firmly in her corner as far as where our attention goes. The film very nearly begins with her first meeting with Jung, jutting her jaw out obtrusively as the telltale sign of her own mental instability. It's never stated what her problem is, but it's never really necessary either.

Box Office Update: Crowded at the Front

I very nearly let this slide, as my Sunday afternoon schedule is quite hazily packed. I have two reviews from yesterday still in the works, not to mention my work outside of this site. It's severely frustrating, so forgive me for not having much enthusiasm vested in the workings of a typical box office weekend. True, this weekend was a fond improvement from last, with three films hitting just above the $20 million mark. All of them opened to fine reviews, and I only expressed interest enough to see one of them, and barely at that. "The Lion King 3D" was not that film, and this being its last week in theaters, I won't be able to check the film out at all as things are currently.

The film still, appropriately, played well this weekend, falling slightly as audiences tried to rake in the film's last winnings while they still could. Falling just barely behind it was "Moneyball", which I gave a slight pass to on Friday. Just on its tail, pun most definitely not intended, was "Dolphin Tale", which somehow found and audience in young children. Who could have guessed that? "Abduction" and "Killer Elite" were a good $10 million down from their newer competitors, but they still managed to fill out the top five. "The Help" fell slightly. "Contagion" fell slightly more. "Drive" fell even more, sadly. We can't account for taste in this particular market, but it was up nearly 20% from last year.

1. "The Lion King 3D" (Second Weekend; $22.1 million)

2. "Moneyball" (First Weekend; $20.6 million)

3. "Dolphin Tale" (First Weekend; $20.3 million)

4. "Abduction" (First Weekend; $11.2 million)

5. "Killer Elite" (First Weekend; $9.5 million)

6. "Contagion" (Third Weekend; $8.6 million)

7. "Drive" (Second Weekend; $5.8 million)

8. "The Help" (Seventh Weekend; $4.4 million)

9. "Straw Dogs" (Second Weekend; $2.1 million)

10. "I Don't Know How She Does It" (Second Weekend; $2 million)

Short Take: "Le Havre" (***)

While walking out of my first film of the day, I caught a couple of older viewers remarking that "they don't make films like that anymore". In quite a few ways they are definitely right. Within moments of "Le Havre", you can tell there's an old-school style being brought to the table. Due merely to my own experience, my mind immediately flocks to "West Side Story". The color pallette, especially in the nighttime scenes, reminds me fondly of the old technicolor conversions of the past. The glow of evening is given this greenish blue tint, and thoughts skew immediately romantic of the old days of cinema. In spite of that, "Le Havre" bares just as many signs of today as it does of the past.

Previously pegged at Cannes as the Palme D'Or frontrunner until "The Tree of Life" proved pundits wrong, "Le Havre" focuses on an elderly shoeshiner named Marcel Marx, living in Le Havre, Normandy. His wife has been growing sicker and sicker each day, to the point where she's placed in the hospital quite gravely. Meanwhile elsewhere in the city, Inspector Monet is put onto the case of a bunch of black immigrants, one young boy of which escapes quite easily from the bumbling police. The boy seeks refuge with Marcel, who inexplicably decides to help the young boy out of the kindness of his heart. If it doesn't sound in keeping with the regular stories of today, there's a random and overstayed rock concert towards the end of the film. 

Film Review: "Moneyball" (***)

"We are card counters at the blackjack table. We're gonna turn the odds on the casino."

That is perhaps the closest that Bennett Miller's new film gets to the snappy and rapid-fire intensity of "The Social Network", another film written by Aaron Sorkin. Although "Moneyball" has had the imprint of a cacophony of other writers, it bares the strongest mark of the recent awards winner. This is a far degree from that previous writing venture, but don't expect me to spend all my time griping that it's not as good as "The Social Network". These two are vastly different films that share that similar feeling. There are plenty of things that this film has in its favor.

"Moneyball" isn't a film I was really too eager to see, so the response I had to it was somewhat positive for my expectations. It's set on the backdrop of the world of baseball, but it's oddly enough not really about baseball. It deals more with what the sport, at its best, represents. Brad Pitt plays Billy Beane, a former baseball player whose luck didn't pan out, and now he's general manager of the ill-budgeted Oakland Athletics. He's the odd man out at the discussion table, with scouts of the old generation of baseball throwing around superficial nitpickery about players. "He has an ugly girlfriend. Ugly girlfriend means no confidence", states one geezer superficially.