Change Your Image
cmarston
Reviews
Rent (2005)
I See a White Light... Now Would be a Good Time to Stop Doing Heroine
Alright I have a confession to make before I can, with good conscience, proceed with this review: I don't like this show and I never have. I don't think it's really necessary to elaborate on that yet as details of those feelings will inevitably come out during this review. My point here though is not to attack the show, but to give an honest and intelligent view of the film adaptation. I'll be honest. As far as intelligent goes: I promise nothing.
First off, I was impressed that they managed to secure nearly the entire Broadway cast for this. It was apparent from on screen interactions and the depth of the various performances that these actors and actresses are comfortable with these characters and with each other. This isn't something that is easy to come by. Take the recent adaptation of The Phantom of the Opera. Unfortunately they managed to get very few people who had performed in the stage show and that came through on screen. A bigger problem is that, out of the countless number of people who they could have gotten to do that movie, they ended up casting a Phantom who had never sung professionally and a Christine who couldn't sing the high notes, but that's not really the point I guess. My point is that it's always better when adapting a stage show for film that you get actors who are both capable of doing the performances and comfortable with the parts. It's a testament to these actors that I enjoyed their portrayals even if I continue to strongly dislike most of the characters.
The renditions of the songs were, for the most part, effectively done. There were times where they got over the top. "Tango: Maureen" comes to mind. Was it really necessary to have a ballroom dance scene there? I understand why they did it, but still. I also have to take a moment and rip on "Light My Candle" because it's just such a stupid song. It's not that it's ineffective or that the intent isn't plot important, I just hate the lyrics. Maybe Jonathon Larson should have spent more time looking for his song. In contrast to the failing moments of the film, Angel's funeral was moving and honest, standing out as one of the few emotional scenes that didn't come off as hackneyed. "La Vie Boheme" was the highlight of the show for me, as it's always been. There are few things more bad ass than breaking out in song in the middle of a restaurant and singing about S&M just makes it that much better.
I think it's important here to stop for a moment and discuss the one character in this show that I actually like: Mark. The thing that drives me crazy about this show is that all of the characters are, at times, almost cartoonish; this isn't helped by having stage actors play the parts. Mark stands out in this show because he has some subtly to his character. He's the underdog, the loyal friend. Despite wanting to be a starving artist he does what is necessary to save himself and his friends while keeping his pride. There are nuances in Mark that don't seem to be apparent in the others. Maybe it's because the other characters are strongly defined by their relationships and Mark is, romantically, alone. Whatever the reason I am glad that I have something to try and analyze when I watch this.
Interesting fact for all you trivia buffs: I don't know who else noticed by the screenwriter for this adaptation was none other than Stephen Chbosky of "The Perks of Being a Wallflower" fame. I guess he's matured with the times and gone from teenaged disillusionment to 20-something disillusionment. Good for him! Now onto my issues with the show in general: my main issue with this show is that they try and tackle too many issues all at once. Although they are all intertwined, heroine addiction, poverty, defiance, AIDS, coming of age, and the many other topics and themes of RENT could all be shows of their own and by throwing them all in together the scope of the show gets a bit too wide and all of the parts become too caricaturish to be believable. I have, however, always been impressed with how they handle homosexual relationships in this show. Rather than treating them as taboo the show portrays them as perfectly normal; an attitude that was not prevalent in the early 90s during the height of the AIDS scare. Even by today's standards this show is progressive. It's sad to think that in over a decade we haven't come any closer to achieving this level of acceptance and understanding. Unfortunately the only things in this show that are outdated are lyrics discussing "dying in America at the end of the millennium" and Mark Cohen's periodic announcement of the date. Other than that everything in this show remains relevant. Perhaps Larson was trying to incorporate as many themes are he could because he felt that others weren't willing to deal with these issues. I wish his plans had produced a less annoying show, but I guess his intentions were good.
It's a good adaptation in that, from what I saw, the way people felt about the stage show was the same way they felt about the movie. A little advice: grab the tissues for this one ladies, but leave your boyfriends at home.
Saw II (2005)
Those Who Make Sequels Don't Deserve Life
Let's start by saying what this movie did have, that will take a lot less time. Gore
check. Creepy puppet and various devices used to permanently dismantle people's craniums
check. Pasty cancer victim forcing the "unworthy" to develop some want to survive
check. Alright, now that that's done I can move on to other, more pressing issues.
I know that everybody, myself included, simply adored the twist ending to the first Saw. Finally learning that the "dead" guy who'd been lying in a pool of his own blood for the entire movie wasn't really dead and was in fact an ingenious, if not twisted as hell, cancer victim striving to show people the value of their meaningless lives was a treasured moment in horror movie history. I can't say much about its staying power in the minds of the general public I will always remember watching that body rise from the floor of that bathroom.
Of course the producers couldn't just reenact the twist from the first one, they had to take it a step farther, keep people guessing. So how do you top a twist as well developed and well executed as the one in Saw? If you take a hint from Saw II I guess the answer is to make the ending so ridiculously contrived that nobody would ever dream of guessing it for fear of feeling stupid even in their own mind. Though I'm sure the girl who played Amanda was thrilled to get her second major acting gig reviving the heroine-addict she so briefly portrayed in the first Saw, I didn't appreciate her reappearance quite so much. It was completely pointless to bring her back; she was useless in the first movie and even more useless in this one. When you get right down to it they used her presence as out: this way they could kill off our friend the cancer victim and still keep the series going. At least we can sleep easy knowing "Amanda" won't soon be out of work.
Unfortunately, the real sin in the writing here is that they simply took it too far. All they had to do was leave it with the SWAT team figuring out that the whole thing was staged and that the kid was really in a "safe" place. That would have been more than enough for me. Also, I could have done without Beverley Mitchell crying constantly, but they couldn't have cast the part better. A decade of complaining on 7th Heaven made her the perfect choice for the part.
The one redeemable quality of this film is the thing that made the first one: a truly original and inventive antagonist. This guy ranks up there with Hannibal and John Doe of Seven on my list of awesome villains. This is where the writers showed their true prowess. They managed to do what is rare these days: they created a powerfully psychopathic serial killer that had a defendable philosophy. "Those who don't value life don't deserve life." It sounds cruel, but there is some part in all of us that has to agree with the sentiment if not the deeds carried out in its name. It bothers me that he claims never to have killed anyone because it seems to me that putting people into a situation where they will almost certainly perish and offering them only a slim chance for survival is grounds for a murder charge. I know what he means, but that one statement is the only stupid thing that he says and he continues to say it despite the glaring error in it. That fact aside, this guy continues to impress me. He outsmarts everybody. The beauty in his strategy is that he tells everybody exactly what they need to know in order to walk out of their given situation entirely intact. He just banks on the fact that people never change and they, when put under immense stress, default to their baser instincts instead of taking a second to think the situation out rationally. The sad truth about humankind is that he will never be disappointed.
Overall I enjoyed the movie, but I had pretty low expectations to begin with. I expected exactly what I got: a solid villain and an hour and a half of gratuitous violence and blood. If you're looking for a great piece of cinematography you're going to be sorely upset with what you see; you'll probably be a little motion-sick by the end too. Bring your sense of humor and check your upchuck reflex at the door, especially if you are sensitive about the use of scalpels on eyeballs.
Haute tension (2003)
When Homo-erotic Fantasies Attack
If you're looking for something frightening (on any level) or even thought-provoking steer clear of "High Tension." However, if you are a fan of poorly-dubbed B-movies then this is the movie for you.
The hilarity throughout this movie never stops as the director attempts to pull off one horror movie cliché after another. Every action is so utterly predictable that it becomes a game for groups of movie-goers to see who can call the next "twist" first. Here's how you beat your friends: just watch the movie and if anything stupid pops into your head about what could possibly happen next say it; you're probably right.
The effects at times are reminiscent of early Friday the 13th films, the sets are whatever buildings happened to be on this particular stretch of road in Southern France, and the story is so hackneyed that one can't help but laugh. The budget for this movie couldn't have been higher then the price of a buzz saw and a beat up van. The ending doesn't even make sense, despite what people say about it being a huge twist that you should have seen coming the entire time. Thankfully, what this film lacks in direction and production it more than makes up for with gratuitous violence and a sexy shower scene followed by an even sexier masturbation scene.
This is clearly the story of a sad, sexual-frustrated man who just needed a little "head." Do yourself a favor and save the $8. Buy a croissant instead: French pastries are scarier than this movie and a lot more palatable.