This period drama could be called Elizabeth: The Prequel for potential marathons with the Cate Blanchett films. It does, after all, deal with Elizabeth's mother and her rise and fall from grace, not to mention being a key figure in kick starting the English Reformation with King Henry VIII. However, despite this being based on fact, I would not go so far as to call it all fact or to view it as some sort of history lesson. I am not so sure I would recommend viewing it for entertainment. Despite a cast boasting Natalie Portman, Scarlet Johansson, and Eric Bana, I would be hard pressed to rave about the acting, or any other portion.The Other Boleyn Girl concerns itself with the sexual and personal politics used by families to gain stature, power, and wealth. It also shows what happens when one wields more power that they actually have and dig themselves in a hole of insurmountable odds. To top it off, the proceedings are handled in dry, melodramatic fashion that makes it look like a stage play with close-ups.
After sitting through the two hour long film, I am left wondering just what I was supposed to take from it. Was it the corruption of power (perceived or otherwise)? Or perhaps the ties of family? Maybe still it was just about the relationships and ways of a bygone era. Whatever the case may be, I left not really caring about any of it.To be honest, the film is not bad on any technical level (of course, it did not excel either). It was shot well, had decent pacing, generally looked good. The problem was in the execution, it fails to bring any sort of heart or energy o the project. I found The Other Boleyn Girl to be lacking in the character department, I could not get up enough of a reason to care about the Boleyn girls or their fate.
The Boleyn family saga plays out like a twisted soap opera, with betrayal, seduction, and manipulation. If not for the execution of the tale, theirs is one of complicated fascination. The era is vastly different than our own and I cannot claim any real working knowledge other than what I remember from history class and what I have gleaned from other period dramas.
The father of the two Boleyn girls, Mary (Scarlet Johansson) and Anne (Natalie Portman), sought to use them to increase the family's standing and power. So, when the opportunity arose to potentially become mistress to the king (Henry VIII), he jumped at the chance and set Anne about the task of seduction.
What follows is Mary catching the eye of King HenryVIII, despite her being married already. He takes her as his mistress, which sets off Anne, who believes that to be her rightful place. Several betraying and manipulating steps later, the places of the two girls switch. Anne's power climbs higher and higher, and we all know what happens once you reach the top, there is no place to go but down.
I will spare you many of the boring details of the story. Suffice to say, the story itself does prove interesting, but the lack of any meat to bite into, well, it just comes across a bit bland.A big problem are the performances, or perhaps it is the way they are written. I just did not like any of them. Are we supposed to see romance? Intrigue? Personal drama? Whatever they were going for I just did not see it. I could not identify with or even like them. The father was weak and selfish, Anne was manipulative and power hungry, and Mary, well, she was the closest to human but still lacked much depth.
I admit, this movie just may not be for me and from a genre that more often than not escapes me. I sat there wanting to like what I was presented with, but I couldn't. There is definitely plenty of intrigue to be milked, but everything is so stagey that it just sucks the humanity out and leaves melodrama that would be better seved on the stage,
Bear witness to Eric Bana's King Henry VIII stomp around like a petulant child who doesn't get what he wants and just sits on the floor and pouts. Watch as Scarlet Johansson whimpers her way through as Mary, never giving us anything to root for, simply making sad faces throughout. All the while Natalie Portman's Anne chews up everything in sight, nothing is left untouched as she boils over with supposed emotion.
Nothing clicked, and when it came to a merciful end I was left wondering why. There is certainly plenty of talent involved, why was this not more involving than it was? Why was everything so drained of personality with wildly overdone theatrics?
Whatever the truth behind the fiction is, you would be better served visiting the biographies written on her life than getting mixed up with this film.
Bottomline. You could do a lot worse on the big screen, but you could also do a lot better. There are those who eat this stuff up who are likely to enjoy seeing this dry telling play out. I hope it works out for you. As for me, I hesitate to call it bad, but it certainly could have been a whole lot more.
Not Recommended.
When I first began listening to Purgatory Dance Party, I could have sworn I had accidentally slipped in a Mr. Bungle CD. Yes, the Bungle and Mike Patton references are easy to make, and possibly a well overused way to describe the band or a feeble attempt by those not entrenched in this bizarro experimental genre. Perhaps that is true, but that makes the comparison no less appropriate. Seriously, can you honestly say that when you first heard "A Wolf in Jesus Skin" you did not double check the liner notes, scouring all corners for a mention of Mike Patton's name? I know I did.
Way back in 1981, Hanna-Barbera ushered in a new era of safe Saturday morning television viewing. It marked the arrival of The Smurfs, a cartoon series that proved incredibly popular and ran for over 250 episodes through 1990. Now, after years of waiting, cartoon fans can now own disks full of their adventures with the release of the first volume, containing 19 episodes of the long running series.
Not only is this the second film to open this weekend that features a cast member from the Star Trek redux (star Anton Yelchin will be Chekhov and Vantage Point's Zoe Saldana is set to play Uhura), it is the second film that plays like a smash up of two earlier films. In this case it combines the renegade spirit of Ferris Bueller's Day Off with a little of the aesthetic and psychiatry of Running With Scissors. The end result falls somewhere in between the two, while it is not rise to the level of Ferris Bueller, it is much more watchable and, dare I say, real feeling than Scissors. It features an engaging lead character and takes a look at the effects of prescription drugs and the ignored and alienated youth of the nation.
Following his pummeling, he finds himself in the office of the family's on-call psychiatrist. The visit results in a prescription for Ritalin, whose effects on kids without the need have been well 
Granted, none of the ground covered is terribly new. We have seen much of this before and the tone is all over the place, but there is something rather engaging about Charlie Bartlett. A large part of the film's success can be laid at the feet of Anton Yelchin, who does not strike the image of your standard teenage hero, rather he beings to mind those teen icons of the 80's, primarily Matthew Broderick and Christian Slater, while still managing to forge a new image. He moves effortlessly across the screen, delivering a character that feels as random as it does calculated.
Over the past few months, if you have set foot inside a theater you have seen the trailer for Vantage Point, complete with the now infamous line: "Stop.... rewind that." delivered with perfect intensity by Dennis Quaid. The way the trailer took over nearly every screen, it could only mean one of two things, the studio has that much confidence in the film or they are hoping a ton of promotion will cover up a poor film. Are either of these true? In reality, probably not; in actuality, not really. So, this is one theory that failed to pan out, at least in my experience with the film. I guess the question then becomes if Vantage Point is worth spending time with or not. Even that answer is not so easy to answer as the film lies somewhere in between excellence and excrement. That is a bit extreme, but it makes the point. Advertising and preconceptions never tell the whole story.
The basic plot has the President (William Hurt) being shot just before delivering a speech in Spain about a new plain to unify countries on five continents in the war on global terror. What follows are the events in the twenty minutes leading up to the shots being fired and their immediate aftermath. We get to see these events from the perspectives of all the major players. These players include the news agency covering the event, the secret service agent (Quaid) protecting the President, a tourist (Forest Whitaker) recording the event to show his kids, a Spanish cop who has multiple reasons for being there, as well as a couple more involved in the actual event rather than victims of the aftermath. All of these angles come to a head in an explosive climax where everyone is revealed to everyone else and it is a race against time.
Now, if you want a film with character development, you will want to skip this. If you are looking for a film with a well-developed plot, you will want to skip this. If, however, you are interested in a movie that is like a chess game, whose sole purpose is to move players around a board in search of check-mate, this may actually be for you. I think you get the picture. Vantage Point is an exercise in plotting over all else. On that level, the movie is quite successful. There is a constant energy throughout as everything continuously surges ahead with few moments to catch your breath.
Michel Gondry began making a name for himself in the music video world, he plied his trade with such artists as Beck, Bjork, The White Stripes, and The Chemical Brothers. In 2001, Gondry made his first appearance a big screen director with Human Nature. Since then, he has been behind a series of interesting and quirky films that succeed to varying degrees. His latest feature is Be Kind, Rewind, a fun little film that pays tribute to the old school communities and a genuine love for the cinema. It has a delightful do it yourself aura and provides genuine laughs and plenty of heart. Is not perfect, but it builds up plenty of goodwill that helps you look past its faults and focus on what it gets right.
As we open we learn of a jazz musician, Fats Waller, and how he was born in what would become the Be Kind, Rewind video rental shop. We are told of how he was the center of the community and their claim to fame. It is a story that has become something of a legend, with each family claiming a piece of the whole. The story shifts to Mr. Fletcher (Danny Glover), he is the owner of the video shop and keeper of the tales of Fats Waller. He is also the father figure to Mike (Mos Def), a young man who works in the shop and has deep feelings for Mr. Fletcher and the community. He is best friends with Jerry (Jack Black), a slightly goofy and immature mechanic who lives in an RV in a junkyard adjacent to a power plant (causing him and any guest to wear colanders on their heads to protect them).
Mike wants to do good by the man who has treated him so well for so long, so when Jerry has a cockeyed scheme to strike a blow at his power plant neighbors, Mike bows out. What happens next provides the main thrust of the film and spurs on much of the comedy.
The deeper in they get, the more attention they draw. So, while they are successful, it is bound to fall sooner or later. The last act of the film moves into sentimental mode, but works in a wonderful manner. It shows the community coming together with the same goal in mind. These may be people that have nowhere else to go, but that does not mean they do not have real ties to where they are at the moment. Everyone brings their love of the community to bear as they exemplify the do it yourself attitude I keep speaking of. The story comes full circle with regards to Fats Waller, and it demonstrates just what it means to be a membe rof a community.