Jackie's comments (member since Jan 14, 2008)

Jackie's comments from the Movies We've Just Watched group.

I just watched this movie and was so inexplicably moved by it. I was a little hesitant because the premise seemed like it could be a bit sordid, but wow! What a surprise. I loved how Ryan Gosling described the script like a trusting child that the actors felt they might taint somehow--or something along those lines. If you see the movie, you will get how poignant and accurate that must have been . . . or not. Maybe I'm just quirky.

I just watched this movie and was so inexplicably moved by it. I was a little hesitant because the premise seemed like it could be a bit sordid, but wow! What a surprise. I loved how Ryan Gosling described the script like a trusting child that the actors felt they might taint somehow--or something along those lines. If you see the movie, you will get how poignant and accurate that must have been . . . or not. Maybe I'm just quirky.

Matt wrote: "I too am a huge fan of HALF NELSON- that film rings so true. Its really all in the details down to those really annoying stickers NYC Dept of Sanitation puts on your car windows when you dont follo..."

I LOVED Half Nelson!! For the same reasons you mentioned but also because I used to teach in an urban school district before I sold out for the suburbs. Don't hate me!! My story did not parallel this teacher's but the material points out the hypocrisy of middle class American thinking that they have what it takes to "save" these kids.

I just saw this movie. It was a bit quirkier than I expected. There is a whole unresolved storyline that seems kind of misplaced involving a random person's interaction with the younger sister.

I thought it was also kind of harsh on the public school system--speaking as a teacher.

Either way, there were many parts I enjoyed, namely Amy Adam's down-and-out performance and the casting of the "popular" nemesis crowd, 5 years after high school. However, there were some lines that Amy Adams seemed to deliver in a way that made them sound like they wanted to be more significant and lost that when delivered as "precious." The movie made you root for the underdog--so if you like that kind of movie, this is for you.

The movie was very interesting. Clint Eastwood did a fantastic job. It felt kind of scripted, but was compelling and poignant in regard to racial reconciliation that is hard-earned. Most of the actors seemed kind of amateur, but that added to the charm. I appreciated that it was set in Michigan--my long-suffering home-state. There were moments of real humor that I didn't expect. (c;

I think my biggest concerns with the movie involved:

1) The casting of the Asian gang members. If the actors who had played Tao (adorable and sweet-looking) and the one who had played his gangster cousin (more stereotypically Asian) were reversed, I think it would have made for a more interesting film. I guess I'm from the school of thought behind the HBO series, "The Wire" in that the sweetest kids can sometimes be drawn into gang life for reasons that make perfectly good sense in regard to self-preservation. In fact, the gangster leader seemed right out of a bad Asian casting call to the point that I thought he looked like the villain from the animated Disney movie, Mulan.

2) I'm not sure if the way the writers "developed" the gang members prepared the audience for **SPOILER ALERT** the rape and murder near the end. That seemed melodramatic and a bit cinematic. I'm not saying Asian gangs are not capable of this, but the gangsters in this movie were barely given any personality or dimension at all, not even the one-dimension of PURE EVIL. In fact, the impression you receive initially is that they are more like "after school special" bullies that people have to endure from a person's family / neighborhood.

3) The way Clint Eastwood's sons were portrayed felt very morality play-ish. They seemed shallow and laughable as well. The way the actors treated the characters felt like any "made for a religious organization" type production in which people act out stereotypes of self-centered Americans. No depth. Maybe that was the point.

I do give Clint Eastwood credit for taking on this topic. His view of the world is conveyed in his brand of "grandpa-ish" wisdom. Adorable!

Eugenia, I did not mean to dismiss the years of bitter history between China and Japan. It was just great to see so many Asian actors at work.

I loved the Joy-Luck Club--I think there was some controversy since some of the actors involved with the film were not, in fact, Chinese but Japanese. I'm sure it was a tempest in a teapot--not to be culturally specific--but either way, the cast was mostly Asian.

This movie has a special place in my heart. Amy Tan herself, appears in the film at a dinner party.

Leshawn, I did watch the special features and enjoyed them thoroughly. I'm a HUGE fan of the HBO series, The Wire, and it reminded me of that kind of thoughtfulness and care taken in movie / film-making.

Phillip--I'm not sure what your specific issue is with Anne Hatheway, but she is amazing in "Rachel Getting Married." In fact, if you don't like her, you might enjoy watching her in this movie since she plays an unsympathetic character, to some degree. I'm not an AH fan, either way, but thoroughly appreciated her work in this movie.

I just saw "Rachel Getting Married" and felt it was the kind of movie I always hope every movie strives to be. The characters were real and engaging. The storyline compelling. The music amazing! I feel like one of those corny movie critic one-liners. But it's that good.

I saw I Love You, Man and was struck by how this seemed to be a mini-workshop for cable / NBC actors: Rashida Jones, Larry Wilmore, Andy Samburg, a couple people from Reno 911, someone from that show that comes on before The Office, the psychologist from Law & Order who was in Juno and also in The Closer . . . It was fun to see them on screen.

This movie was the kind in which you can see into its future . . . A Happy Gilmore that you will catch bits and piece of, from time to time, in years to come as it reruns happily on cable.

I also LOVED Rashida Jones' outfits. Adorable!!

I forgot about the Joy-Luck Club!! I also liked The Secret Life of Bees. I did not like the book very much, but really really enjoyed the movie.

To Kill a Mockingbird!! Yes!

I also felt, strangely, that the movie of The Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, fixed some of the literary problems I had with the book. I know it's not a significant work of literary fiction, but it was notable--especially for America's role!

Larry Wilmore's book, I Wish We'd Got Casinos, has a whole chapter on this topic. Hilarious!

What did HW see in the pseudo-uncle's journal that caused him to want to burn down the house? Was it the picture of a woman that triggered questions about his own lost mother or was it the guns? Did HW feel jealous of another man monopolizing his father's time and possibly displacing him, as he knew his hold on his father was tenuous at best? Or was he completely frustrated at losing his hearing that he was going mad--having seizures, etc.? Maybe all of the above?

Amanda wrote: "I agree with all the praise for the writing and acting. Having just seen this last night, my head is still spinning from the film's concepts.

Perhaps the story also wanted to develop the idea o..."

I agree . . . at the same time, the tragic death of Jackman's (actor--forgot the character's spelling Angier?) wife was truly upsetting. Without knowing the ending, it did feel very callous for Bale's character to keep replying that he wasn't sure which knot he tied. If he and his brother were going to keep switching, why didn't his brother simply confide to the other brother which knot he had tied and express empathy for the woman's death--although I am aware that she had falsely declared that she could escape such a knot therefore implicating herself in her own death to some degree.

This initial sympathy for Jackman's character was difficult to overcome as the movie progressed. The horror of all of those dead bodies killed each night was not completely made clear so his final horrific demise wasn't immediately apparent. But maybe that was the point.

Did anyone understand the significance of 100 performances? I wasn't quite sure about that. My best guess was that it was bait--or what he thought it would take to lure his competitor to the performance eventually.

I wasn't sure what to think of this movie. ***SPOILER***
I was disappointed that it ended with the supernatural. I thought that was cheating a bit. Not to mention that the red herrings were swimming up stream in a frenzy. What did you think?

The best and worst part of the movie was the way it was written--intercutting between the past, present and then taking us into the future. Your perception of the characters kept shifting as well which was also refreshing. Until the end. Then I felt that the last scenes really let the rest of the movie down with ultimately taking sides. hmmm

I enjoyed "This Christmas" . . . it's not at all intellectual or whatnot--in fact is pretty much predictable and formulaic--and it's basically a vehicle for singer/dancer Chris Brown, but if you want to see any of your favorite African American actors from The Wire, Boston Public or Everybody Hates Chris you're in luck. The most difficult part of the movie is figuring out how everybody is related in the beginning. There's also a connection with the most recent version of 90210 that is a tad amusing involving one of the only Caucasian actors in the movie.

I just re-watched Fresh after several years. What a clever movie and the director's commentary is very thoughtful. For any HBO The Wire fans out there, this movie lays some groundwork for that series, in my opinion. I'm thinking of specifically dealing with the complex personalities of the underclass that rarely get portrayed as other than stereotypes in tv dramas or caricatures in urban movies. The director was also commenting on his approach to violence on film which matched what I've heard Ed Burns and David Simon express--which is to say that they resist portraying violence but rather the aftermath--as violence is often glorified even in anti-violence pictures.

Finally--the character of Fresh (Michael) seems to me to be a somewhat of a precursor to Michael Lee on Season 4 of The Wire.

Some people have a real problem with the violence perpetrated against an animal in the film, but the director justifies this disturbing decision to include it in the picture in a very convincing way in the commentary if you're interested.

I was not a big fan of this book--it felt too "precious" and a little bit melodramatic. However, this movie was so well-cast and well-executed that I highly recommend it to anyone interested in witnessing a mediocre book become a fairly decent movie. Usually it's the other way around.

I connected with it also because the producer, Gina Prince-Bythewoods is a fellow adopted person who initially passed on the movie but after some self-examination returned to it and gave it a beautiful treatment. I really wish the backstory of the 3 sisters were the perspective of the book / movie rather than that of the young white girl. That's probably my biggest beef with the book--that perspective was done to classic heights in To Kill a Mockingbird, and is certainly not eclipsed here. The actors playing the sisters are amazing. Queen Latifah, Alicia Keys and Sophie Okonedo.

I saw "The Duchess" this weekend with my aunt and had no idea about the storyline. Frankly, I had been turned off to period movies since I saw "The Other Boleyn Girl" which I thought was horrible!! I found "The Duchess" well acted and not overly sentimental. There are a few scenes in it that I thought were especially moving. I wondered what others thought of it.