Review: "Toy Story" Was and Still is the Best Picture of 1995

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 89 (of 2010) by Leroy Douresseaux

Toy Story (1995)
Running time: 80 minutes (1 hour, 20 minutes)
MPAA – G
DIRECTOR: John Lasseter
WRITERS: Joss Whedon, Andrew Stanton, Joel Cohen, and Alec Sokolow; from a story by John Lasseter, Pete Docter, Andrew Stanton, and Joe Ranft
PRODUCERS: Bonnie Arnold and Ralph Guggenheim
EDITORS: Robert Gordon and Lee Unkrich
COMPOSER: Randy Newman
Academy Award winner

ANIMATION/FANTASY/ADVENTURE/COMEDY/FAMILY

Starring: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Don Rickles, Jim Varney, Wallace Shawn, John Ratzenberger, Annie Potts, John Morris, Laurie Metcalf, and R. Lee Emery

Released in 1995, Disney/Pixar’s Toy Story is remembered as the first feature-length, computer-animated film (or 3D animation). Being the first film made entirely with computer-generated imagery (CGI) may be Toy Story’s main claim to fame, but it is also a superb film. Its sophisticated screenplay is full of wit and rich characterization, and the film challenges the notion that only Oscar-caliber films can deliver mature drama and complex storytelling.

Toy Story is set in a world where toys come to life when their owners are not present. The story focuses on a traditional, pull-string, talking cowboy doll named Woody (Tom Hanks). Woody is the leader of a group of toys belonging to a six-year-old boy named Andy Davis (John Morris). Woody has also long enjoyed a place of honor as the favorite among Andy’s menagerie of toys. Woody is prepping the others toys for the Davis family’s big move to a new home. In the meantime, Andy is having his party a week before his actual birthday, so the toys stage a reconnaissance mission to discover what new presents Andy will receive.

It turns out that Andy’s favorite birthday gift is a new action figure – a space ranger Buzz Lightyear (Tim Allen). Buzz is an impressive toy that has lots of things on it that light up and make noise, and even has pop-up wings. Disappointed and resentful because he believes Buzz has taken his place, Woody plots to get rid of Buzz. His plan, however, backfires, and both Woody and Buzz end up on an adventure that might cost them their happy home and their very survival.

Toy Story is full of charming and funny characters, and they will be especially appealing to people who remember owning a toy that was their very best friend. The characters are what make this movie. Even though Toy Story marked the dawn of a new era of movie animation, it would be merely a technical achievement without such winning characters.

In fact, one cannot help but marvel at how fully-realized Woody and Buzz are. We watch each character grow and also see what seems like a real friendship blossom. It all feels real because Woody and Buzz’s personalities are revealed through the story’s action. Conflict and dilemma challenge the characters within the film, and how the two react tells the audience more about them.

It seems as if 3D animation has created a strange, almost real world that looks as if it is somewhere between animation and reality. This is what Toy Story introduced to movie audiences, but it would all seem flat without the characters. Toy Story has exceptional characters in a special story, and so it is more than just a landmark technical achievement.

10 of 10

NOTES:
1996 Academy Awards: 1 win: “Special Achievement Award” (John Lasseter – For the development and inspired application of techniques that have made possible the first feature-length computer-animated film.); 3 nominations: “Best Music, Original Musical or Comedy Score” (Randy Newman), “Best Music, Original Song” (Randy Newman for the song "You've Got a Friend"), and “Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen” (Joss Whedon-screenplay, Andrew Stanton-screenplay/story, Joel Cohen-screenplay, Alec Sokolow-screenplay, John Lasseter-story, Pete Docter-story, and Joe Ranft-story)

1996 Golden Globes: 2 nominations: “Best Motion Picture - Comedy/Musical” and “Best Original Song - Motion Picture” (Randy Newman for the song "You Got a Friend in Me")

1997 BAFTA Awards: 1 nomination: “Best Achievement in Special Visual Effects” (Eben Ostby and William Reeves)

Monday, November 01, 2010

 

----------------------------------------

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Soundtrack Due November 16

Press release:

WaterTower Music Announces November 16 Release Date for the Soundtrack to Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1

Limited Edition Soundtrack Collector’s Set Also Unveiled

BURBANK, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--WaterTower Music is excited to announce the release of the original motion picture soundtrack for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1, the latest installment of the Harry Potter film franchise. The album will be available everywhere Tuesday, November 16. Featuring 26 compositions by Golden Globe winner and Oscar- and Grammy Award-nominated composer Alexandre Desplat, the soundtrack provides the listener with over 70 minutes of new music from the film. All fans who purchase the CD will also receive a free download of the entire soundtrack in 5.1 Surround Sound Audio.

Additionally, a special limited collector’s edition of the soundtrack will be made available. Each numbered collector’s set features the full soundtrack, a bonus CD with extra music, an exclusive poster, picture disc vinyl, a DVD including video interviews and the soundtrack in 5.1 Surround Sound Audio, original Harry Potter film cells, autographed sheet music, and a numbered certificate of authenticity. This special set will be made available at retail stores in time for Christmas and is available by pre-order now at online retail. More details are available at www.deathlyhallowssoundtrack.com.

Desplat composed the captivating score, which was recorded by the London Symphony Orchestra at the famed Abbey Road Studios. “I’m thrilled to be involved with the magical world of Harry Potter,” declared the composer. “It’s an extraordinary story of extraordinary people, which allows me to play with a world of extraordinary sounds.”

Alexandre Desplat is a three-time Academy Award® nominee for his scores for Fantastic Mr. Fox, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button and The Queen. He also won a Golden Globe Award for The Painted Veil. His additional work includes the scores to Twilight Saga: New Moon, Julie & Julia, Syriana and Birth.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1, which opens nationwide on Friday, November 19, begins the seventh and final adventure in the Harry Potter film series, the much-anticipated motion picture event to be told in two full-length parts. Part 2 opens nationwide on July 15, 2011.

Warner Bros. Pictures presents a Heyday Films Production, a David Yates Film, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1. The film is directed by David Yates, and produced by David Heyman, David Barron, and J.K. Rowling. Steve Kloves adapted the screenplay, based on the book by Rowling. Lionel Wigram is the executive producer. Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson reprise the roles of Harry Potter, Ron Weasley and Hermione Granger. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1 will be distributed worldwide by Warner Bros. Pictures, a Warner Bros. Entertainment Company. It has been rated PG-13 for some sequences of intense action violence, frightening images and brief sensuality.

http://www.harrypotter.com/

Review: Well, at Least I Liked "Connie and Carla" (Happy B'day, Toni Collette)

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 198 (of 2004) by Leroy Douresseaux

Connie and Carla (2004)
Running time: 98 minutes (1 hour, 38 minutes)
MPAA – PG-13 for thematic elements, sexual humor, and drug references
DIRECTOR: Michael Lembeck
WRITER: Nia Vardalos
PRODUCERS: Gary Barber, Roger Birnbaum, Jonathan Glickman, Tom Hanks, and Rita Wilson
CINEMATOGRAPHER: Roger Greatrex
EDITOR: David Finfer

COMEDY/MUSIC

Starring: Nia Vardalos, Toni Collette, David Duchovny, Stephen Spinella, Alec Mapa, Christopher Logan, Robert Kaiser, Ian Gomez, Nick Sandow, Dash Mihok, Robert John Burke, and Boris McGiver with Debbie Reynolds

Connie and Carla was a box office dud, but I wanted to see the movie the first time I saw a commercial for it. Having finally seen the comedy/faux musical, I enjoyed it as much as I thought I would. It’s a good old fashion fish-out-of-water and mistaken identity comedy, and it has two exceptional leads in Nia Vardalos and Toni Collette.

In the film, Connie (Nia Vardalos) and Carla (Toni Collette) are two struggling Chicago dinner theatre performers, making a living where they can, in this case, at an airport bar. They witness their boss’ murder at the hands of Rudy (Robert John Burke), a Russian mobster. Unfortunately, when their boss knew he was in trouble, he slipped a kilo of cocaine that belonged to Rudy in Carla’s bag. Now, Rudy wants his coke and the girls dead, so Connie and Carla head out to the place no one would think of looking for them because it has no dinner theatre, Los Angeles.

After unsuccessfully hunting for work, they pretend to be drag queens and begin a drag musical act that is so popular, it lifts the status of the club where they perform. The local drag queens and the straight community embrace them, and they turn their new boss, Stanley’s (Ian Gomez), bar into a very hot dinner theatre club. Connie also falls for Jeff (David Duchovny), the straight brother of one of the drag queens, but Jeff thinks Connie is a man, much to her chagrin. However, they left Connie’s dumb boyfriend, Al (Nick Sandow), and Carla’s equal dumb squeeze, Mikey (Dash Mihok), behind in Chicago. Before long Al and Mikey and Rudy and his musical theatre-loving henchman, Tibor (Boris McGiver) come looking for the girls. Can they save their own lives and keep the fact that they’re women pretending to be men pretending to be women secret?

Nia Vardalos’s script combines the best elements of films like Sister Act, Some Like it Hot, and Victor/Victoria, and director Michael Lembeck puts together a comedy that mixes slap stick and poignant political correctness into entertainment. It’s the most feel-good drag queen movie from a major Hollywood studio that I’ve seen, mainly because it treats it subject matter in a glossy way. The film assumes that if you’re a good guy, you accept drag queens even if you’re not 100% OK with their culture and lifestyle.

Sociology aside, the lead actresses make this film. Ms. Vardalos is just plain funny; she has a face and personality made for broad, goofy, dumb, obvious comedies. If it’s a farce or a tale about different cultures and groups thrown together, she can milk it for lots of yucks. Ms. Vardalos is also blessed with an excellent co-star in Toni Collette. Although many remember her as the put upon mother in The Sixth Sense, Ms. Collette is a fine actress who is an exceptionally good comedic character actress; she’s a pleasure to watch.

If one isn’t uptight about drag queens or gays, if one is secure with one’s sexual orientation, and if one isn’t a religious bigot, Connie and Carla is light-hearted fun. It’s not the smartest movie, but between the music, show tunes, dance routines, and broad drag queen humor, it’s darn funny.

7 of 10
B+

-------------------------

November Gives Thanks for Negromancer

Welcome to Negromancer, the rebirth of my former movie review website as a movie review and movie news blog. I’m Leroy Douresseaux, and I also blog at http://ireadsyou.blogspot.com/ and write for the Comic Book Bin (which has smart phones apps).

All images appearing on this blog are © copyright and/or trademark their respective owners.

"Capitalism: A Love Story" Shows No Love for Greed

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 88 (of 2010) by Leroy Douresseaux

Capitalism: A Love Story (2009)
Running time: 127 minutes (2 hours, 7 minutes)
MPAA – R for some language
WRITER/DIRECTOR: Michael Moore
PRODUCERS: Anne Moore and Michael Moore
CINEMATOGRAPHER: Daniel Marracino and Jayme Roy
EDITORS: Jessica Brunetto, Alex Meillier, Tanya Meillier, Conor O'Neill, Pablo Proenza, T. Woody Richman, and John Walter

DOCUMENTARY

Starring: Michael Moore, William Black, US Congressman Elijah Cummings, Sheriff Warren Evans, Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, Wallace Shawn, and Elizabeth Warren

Capitalism: A Love Story is a 2009 documentary film by author and director, Michael Moore. The film focuses on the financial crisis that began in 2007 (and continued into 2010) and indicts capitalism and the current economic order of the United States. Moore details how capitalism via corporations dominates the lives of Americans and the rest of the world (by default).

Moore’s film travels around the country, especially Middle America, detailing how the excesses of capitalism and corporate greed have damaged, even destroyed the lives of some Americans. Moore attempts to enter the halls of power in Washington D.C. and the global financial epicenter in Manhattan, specifically Wall Street, to discuss greed and government bailouts. Capitalism: A Love Story’s topics include corporate-owned life insurance (called “dead peasants insurance), for-profit prisons, home foreclosures and evictions, the influence of Goldman Sachs in Washington D.C., modern worker strikes, Wall Street’s “casino mentality,” and more. The film asks several questions, but the most prominent being, what is the price that America pays for its love of capitalism? The film also has a religious component in which Moore wonders if capitalism is a sin and if Jesus would have been a capitalist.

Obviously the title, Capitalism: A Love Story, is a misnomer, but this isn’t a hate story. Moore examines “unfettered and unregulated” capitalism and also how modern capitalism is defined by greed, an insatiable lust for money, and the tendency to view everything and everyone as a commodity – all subject to exploitation. Moore is more than just a documentary filmmaker; he is also a crusader. As such he presents evidence and information specifically designed to prove his point – in this case that capitalism is destructive and evil – and also to get his audience politically aware and socially active.

Sometimes, Moore’s own actions in his movies come across as stunts – like his antics on Wall Street and near Congress in this movie. In Capitalism: A Love Story, this only serves to hurt the movie’s credibility and also makes him look more like a prankster than a documentary filmmaker. Like Fahrenheit 9/11, Capitalism: A Love Story avoids perfection because of its creator’s tendency to clown.

Still, Moore dazzles with his ability to tell stories about the struggles and suffering of ordinary working Americans. He is also one of the best American filmmakers working today. Impressive storytelling and exceptional technical skills are the calling cards of this brilliant movie director. When such a director tackles our nation’s most pressing issues, we should pay attention because it matters.

8 of 10
A

NOTES:
2010 Image Awards: 1 nomination: “Award Outstanding Documentary (Theatrical or Television)”

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Michael Moore's SiCKO Chronicles Real Death Panels

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 12 (of 2008) by Leroy Douresseaux

Sicko (2007)
Running time: 123 minutes (2 hours, 3 minutes)
MPAA – PG-13 for brief strong language
WRITER/DIRECTOR: Michael Moore
PRODUCERS: Michael Moore and Meghan O’Hara
EDITOR: Geoffrey Richman, Christopher Seward, and Dan Swietlik
Academy Award nominee

DOCUMENTARY

Starring: Michael Moore, Tarsha Harris, and Larry and Donna Smith

In his most recent documentary, Sicko, Oscar-winning filmmaker Michael Moore (Bowling for Columbine) set his sights on the state of the American healthcare system, examining the plight of both the uninsured and the under-insured. Moore’s argument: in the world’s richest country, 45 million people have no health insurance, while HMO’s grow in size and wealth.

During his investigation, Moore uses his trademark humor and confrontational style and attempts to shed light on the complicated medical affairs and tragedies of a wide-range of Americans. Sticking to his tried-and-true one-man approach, Moore also visits Canada, Great Britain, France, and Cuba to compare how those countries provide basic health care coverage free for their citizens.

Michael Moore is clearly dismayed that so powerful and wealthy as nation as the United States should put so many of its citizens in the position of gambling their health will always be good. Sicko seems to reveal that Moore is equally surprised and perhaps angry that the system is such a mess that even people with health insurance are not always better off than the uninsured. Moore shows how the system got that way, and then relying on people rather than statistics, he introduces his audience to various Americans who’ve suffered as a result of a system that emphasizes profit over the well-being of its patients. Some sick people even get a death sentence – in the form of a refusal to pay for a lifesaving procedure – personally from their insurance provider.

The carnival atmosphere that hangs over Moore’s films (especially Fahrenheit 9/11) is still here, but Moore rarely loses focus in reminding us that American can do better for more of its citizens when it comes to healthcare. Though his surprise sometimes comes across as disingenuous, Moore uses droll humor and sly wit to ignite the fire in your belly and the rage in your heart. I must admit that there is some unintentional humor: some of the services that European governments provide for their citizens border on nanny state overkill, but who has the last laugh? Them or we Americans?

Sicko, Moore’s best film since Roger & Me, demands that American healthcare be reformed to help all citizens regardless of financial status. Moore also argues that only those with something to gain from the status quo will ignore the sobering realities.

10 of 10

NOTES:
2008 Academy Awards: 1 nomination for “Best Documentary, Features” (Michael Moore and Meghan O’Hara)

2008 Image Awards: 1 nomination for “Outstanding Documentary (Theatrical or Television)

Sunday, March 09, 2008

Fahrenheit 9/11 a Tour de Force

TRASH IN MY EYE No. 146 (of 2004) by Leroy Douresseaux

Fahrenheit 9/11 (2004)
Running time: 122 minutes (2 hours, 2 minutes)
MPAA – R for some violent and disturbing images, and for language
WRITER/DIRECTOR: Michael Moore
PRODUCERS: Jim Czarnecki, Kathleen Glynn, and Michael Moore
EDITORS: Kurt Engfehr, T. Woody Richman, and Christopher Seward

DOCUMENTARY/WAR

Starring: George W. Bush, Lila Lipscomb, and Michael Moore

His detractors have called documentary filmmaker Michael Moore everything from a polemist to a propagandist. The Oscar® winning director (Bowling for Columbine) is the best known American documentary movie maker, even better known than such acclaimed talents as Ken Burns and Errol Morris. In the late spring of 2004, Moore debuted is most controversial work to date, Fahrenheit 9/11, in which Moore aims his camera squarely at the administration and policies of U.S. President George W. Bush.

Fahrenheit 9/11 details the connections between the Bush family and various Saudi Arabian oil interests, especially the bin Laden family – ironic considering that Bush and the bin Laden family member who is the alleged architect of the September 11, 2001 attacks on America, Osama bin Laden, are now mortal enemies. The film also takes a look at what happened after 9/11/2001, and how the Bush administration used the tragic event to push its agenda. Moore’s claims include accusations that Bush family and business associates have greatly benefited monetarily from the subsequent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq through government military and petrochemical contracts. Fahrenheit 9/11 later takes a look at the affects of combat in Iraq on the soldiers and Iraqi citizens, and Moore interviews Lila Lipscomb, a proud and patriotic mother whose son dies in Iraq.

Unlike Moore’s films, Roger & Me and the aforementioned Columbine, Moore, as a character, does not make many on-screen appearances in Fahrenheit. Fahrenheit 9/11 is more focused than the Academy Award-winning Columbine because Moore has to spend a great deal of the film detailing his arguments, especially in the film’s first half. The first hour or so of Fahrenheit 9/11 is where Moore makes his arguments that George Bush and his cronies and administration used the war to enact government and social policies that they wanted to force on Americans all along and that the terrorist attacks on the U.S. gave them the opening they needed. Moore claims that ultimately the war in Iraq was more about the Hand Puppet’s administration’s desire to make money than protecting the U.S. What makes Michael Moore’s argument convincing is that he culls so much archival news footage, photographs, and video from recent news conferences. Thus, the subjects of his film do the vast majority of the talking and inadvertently convict themselves and prove Moore’s points.

The first half of Fahrenheit 9/11, when it focuses on George Bush, is outrageous and hilarious. Michael Moore has the gift of being both subtle and blunt when it comes to humor. His satire has the precision of a scalpel, and he presents arguments with the blunt force of a fist; he is brutal and relentless. Considering how so many Hollywood directors of comedies now rely on childish gross out jokes to sell their “humor,” Moore is likely the smartest film director of humor in America. He uses President Bush and his associates like hapless sock puppets for his jokes, all the while he expertly delineates their follies.

The second half of Fahrenheit 9/11 is a bit of a downer, as Moore takes his camera to Iraq to interview soldiers. He also interviews a soldier’s mother from his hometown of Flint, Michigan. Although many critics have claimed that Michael Moore portrayed the American servicemen and servicewomen as villains, I found that to be otherwise. The little time the soldiers are on camera, Moore shows warts and all, but the soldiers come out looking like humans and not killing machines. They make mistakes and do ugly things, but Moore shows them as the heroes – guys and girls just doing their jobs. If the job is wrong, it’s not by their hands, but it’s on the people who sent them there.

The other segment of Fahrenheit 9/11 that’s really hard to watch is Moore’s time spent with Lila Lipscomb, the mother of a slain soldier. His camera takes such an intimate look at her life surrounding her son’s service in Iraq that when tragedy strikes, the viewer also feels the pain.

As good as Moore is at making documentaries, he also uses film to make commentary, and he uses film as if he were an essayist. He’s also part of that other group of journalists, reporters, storytellers, etc. who go beyond the safe borders where mainstream American media won’t go. Michael Moore just happens to be the loudest source of alternative information concerning politics and society, and Fahrenheit 9/11 may be his most accomplished work. Still, it’s by no means perfect; sometimes the film looses focus (as during his visit with two Oregon state troopers). However, Fahrenheit 9/11 is a sign of even greater things to come from Moore, and it’s one of the best films of the year.

9 of 10
A+

NOTES:
2004 Cannes Film Festival: 2 wins: “FIPRESCI Prize Competition” (Michael Moore) and Golden Palm or “Palme d’Or” (Michael Moore)