Category Archives: Indie

Movie Review: Frances Ha

Leave a reply

At a very brief glance, “Frances Ha” is nothing more than a walking indie film trope. “Frances Ha” has everything that indie filmmakers love: ukeleles, Paris, children of divorce.”

I’m one to talk, as I consume movies like this a little too much. However, what seperates “Frances Ha” from the rest is its ambition and, despite its aimless characters, it actually has a good amount to say. Unfortunately, a lot of those things are left unsaid.

Dramedy is not the right word for “Frances Ha.” Tragicomedy would be a better way to put it, despite the fact that not many big, tragic events occur during its short running time. “Frances Ha” is filled with a lot of sad characters who are stuck in ruts. Yet, Noah Baumbach manages to find little bits of humor in all of the depression that always work so well. He is not just showing how these people live, but also prodding at them a little bit.


Director Noah Baumbach has clearly found his muse in Greta Gerwig, who co-wrote the film with Baumbach and stars as Frances. The two first collaborated on “Greenberg,” but “Frances Ha” works a little better. Baumbach is better at portraying ennui in his hometown of New York than in Los Angeles.

Unlike Greenberg and many other of Baumbach’s characters, Frances is not a complete loner. Her friendship with Sophie (Mickey Sumner) can best be described as co-dependent. Or in their own words, they’re like “a lesbian couple that doesn’t have sex anymore.” Their career goals couldn’t be more different: Frances wants to be a dancer and model, and Sophie hopes to one day run the publishing industry. These are the kind of goals the people in their 20s that live in Brooklyn have.

“Frances Ha” is mainly about how the friendship between Frances and Sophie deteriorates as Sophie moves on but Frances doesn’t. Frances becomes a drifter, going from apartment to apartment and couch to couch. Most notably, she stays with Lev (Adam Driver) and Benji (Michael Zegen), two aspiring artists who are kept afloat because of their rich parents.

“Frances Ha” explores an idea also explored in the very similar “Girls” that the spoiled seem to be the only ones who have the time to pursue artistic dreams. Frances is the rare poor artist. Yet, nobody seems to appreciate their opportunities when they come about. Benji gets a chance to send in a skit to “Saturday Night Live,” yet he doesn’t even seem to care if he gets it because he thinks the show isn’t as good as it used to be. Shockingly, this is something that people actually say.

As Sophie, relative newcomer Sumner makes a big impression. She can portray straight-laced heartbreak even when she seems absolutely calm. Meanwhile, Gerwig once again proves herself to be one of the most underrated actresses working today. One of my biggest problems with the film was that it’s opinion on Frances wasn’t always very clear. Gerwig knows when to make her likable and hatable. Sometimes, she can do both at the exact same time.

Unlike Baumbach’s past works, “Frances Ha” actually comes with a sense of relative closure. I have always had mixed feelings about Baumbach’s work, yet I always find myself excited about whatever new film he has planned. Ever since I saw “The Graduate,” I’ve been attracted to characters who don’t know what they want to do with their life. It’s the opposite of the uber-confidence that is usually considered to be the norm. It’s always refreshing to see someone admit that they have no idea what they’re doing. Deep down, we all feel the exact same way.

Movies with aimless characters only work if they have a point. “Frances Ha” works because it has a point. However, I still don’t quite know how Baumbach and Gerwig actually feel about Frances. There is no one there to really call her out ever. There is no Greek Chorus to tell the audience how to feel, which is good in one way, but bad in other ways. The film cycles through a lot of different characters in its short yet ambitious running time, but it often doesn’t take a second to let us know who they are and what their stance is. Frances spends a long time back home in Sacramento, but never once do they seem worried that their 27-year-old daughter is basically broke.

Yet, the flaws of the film still don’t hold it back too far. This is the first time Baumbach has shed more hope than cynicism into one of his films. Not to mention, it has the best soundtrack of any film so far this year and some really whip smart dialogue. At one point, Frances mentions that Walden Pond, where Henry David Thoreau lived and wrote in seclusion, was actually only five minutes away from his mother’s house. “Frances Ha” wants to be the voice of all twenty-somethings who aren’t nearly as independent as they think they are. You’ll probably connect to it, as long as you’ve ever lived in the vicinity of Brooklyn.

Movie Review: Cedar Rapids

2 Replies

When done right, two genres can somehow fit together quite well. Even if one of them is a little immature, and the other tries to be sophisticated.

This is what the minds behind “Cedar Rapids” try to do. Whether or not it succeeds depends on how much you think laughs cover up for cliches.
If I could think of two words to describe “Cedar Rapids,” they would both begin with “Q”: quaint and quirky. Maybe it’s a little too quaint, and a little too quirky. “Cedar Rapids” begins in a very small Wisconsin town. Insurance salesman Tim Lippe (Ed Helms) has inhabited this town his whole life, and has yet to go very far. He’s also sleeping with his former teacher (Sigourney Weaver).
One day, Tim gets the opportunity of a lifetime, or at least, the opportunity of a lifetime for someone like him. He gets asked to speak at an insurance convention in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Things in the outside world are not as comfortable as they are in his small town. He’s forced to room with the misguided, insane, and slightly brain dead Dean Ziegler (John C. Reilly), and Ronald Wilkes (Isiah Whitlock Jr.), a man who needs to cut loose and have a little fun.
On his trip, Tim also befriends a prostitute (Alia Shawkat), and a woman who could just be the love of his life (Anne Heche). And he has to deal with some unexpected corruption in the insurance industry.
“Cedar Rapids” seems to be following a new trend of making raunchy, edgy stories on an independent budget, something similar to last summer’s “Cyrus.” Like “Cyrus,” the result of “Cedar Rapids” is pretty hilarious with a lot of problems. What I ask for in a modern independent film, especially one that comes from Fox Searchlight, is some originality.
Its plot and style are very similar to that of last year’s “Up in the Air,” except it takes that film’s amazing twist and doesn’t make it surprising at all. That’s what more comedies could use today: surprise.
The film also seemed to be aspiring to be “The 40-Year-Old Virgin.” It has that same character who’s too good of a guy, yet he needs to grow up. However, “Cedar Rapids” doesn’t reach that film’s subtlety, hilarity, nor its surprising insightfulness. The real problem with “Cedar Rapids” is that it thinks its much deeper than it actually is.
The real strength of “Cedar Rapids” lies in its characters. Mainly, Ed Helms as Tim Lippe. As Lippe, Helms brings humanity, joy, and even some knowledge to such a strange role. This former “Daily Show” correspondent fills in the awkward leading man role perfectly.
The rest of the supporting characters also fill out the movie quite well. Reilly is hilarious as always, playing someone who has the potential to either be a serial killer or simply someone with a minor degree of down syndrome. Whitlock basically steals the entire movie when he pulls out a little impression from “The Wire.”
“Cedar Rapids” aspires to be one of those comedies where setting is the driving point of the story, and the whole thing would be a sort of geographical satire. It doesn’t quite reach that point and instead it gets caught up in a few over-the-top (yet very funny) gags in addition to a lot of gay innuendos. Instead, character becomes a driving point of the story. Maybe with just a little more focus this could have been a unpredictable, inspiring, and insightful independent comedy rather than just, well, a pretty funny one.

Movie Review: Blue Valentine

Leave a reply

If there ever was such an honor, “Blue Valentine” would win the award for most depressing film of 2010. This honor is not meant to put down any of the achievements of the film, but rather a heads up that this is not a film about the world’s happiest marriage.

“Blue Valentine” has two settings and two time periods: rural Pennsylvania and New York City, past and present. In present day, married couple Dean (Ryan Gosling) and Cindy (Michelle Williams) are on the verge of a breakdown. Cindy no longer feels any affection for her husband, and Dean remains in an aloof, child-like state. The marriage between Dean and Cindy is the ultimate portrait of disappointment.
In flashbacks, the story behind Cindy and Dean’s love is revealed, as the audience slowly finds out that at one point, there really was love to be had in this marriage.
The story of a couple falling in love and becoming bored and suppressed with age is a story that has been portrayed on the silver screen over and over again. “Blue Valentine” does manage to be saved from being one big cliche. Unlike other films about broken marriages like “American Beauty,” “Blue Valentine” is as much about the joy of love as it is about the pain. Most films about marriage portray how a marriage can fall apart. Few also show how they are built.
The flashbacks in “Blue Valentine” are certainly the most effective part of the film. Not only do they build backstory, they also build emotion. The contrast between the clear, digitally shot present day and the shaky hand-held filming of the flashbacks show misery becoming clearer and clearer. The flashbacks are marked by youthful innocence, and the present day is marked by sad awareness in older age.
“Blue Valentine” would not be the same without its two outstanding lead performances. The two actors play the parts perfectly in both old age and youth. Despite his image, Gosling is not afraid to get dirty in order to play his role perfectly. Throughout the film, he looks less like Ryan Gosling and more like Nicolas Cage in “Raising Arizona.” With his scruffy looked and muffled voice, he is almost unrecognizable.
His female counterpart, Michelle Williams, gives one of the best female performances of the year. She seems to have a thing for playing alienated wives (see: “Brokeback Mountain”), yet here she does it better than she ever has. There is one scene where she pulls off a rare feat and manages to act with her eyes when the rest of her body isn’t shown. In those eyes we see so much sheltered pain getting ready to come out. In those eyes we see, there is no love for her husband to be found.
“Blue Valentine” can loosely be described as a he said-she said type of story. Here is where the film’s major problem lies: it tries to make us choose who to be sympathetic for. At first, it all seems to be the wife’s fault. Then, it suddenly all becomes the husband’s fault. In the end, it strangely doesn’t acknowledge the problems on both sides and it makes us feel inclined toward only one character. The film could have used a smoother transition, or maybe more of a reconciling.
What drove me to this film, and what might drive many more of you, is the controversy surrounding the film. “Blue Valentine” originally carried a deadly NC-17 rating. After protest, that rating was brought down to an R. The NC-17 came mainly from the sex scenes which are graphic, but not pornographic. They are used not to give the audience some unholy pleasure but rather to show the different stages and feelings of the marriage.
Perhaps its rating was also raised because the MPAA felt that younger viewers would be too disturbed by this film to want to see it anyway. What is to be afraid of? Reality? Anyone who is mature enough to want to buy a ticket for “Blue Valentine” is mature enough to view it.

How Arcade Fire Changed My Life This Year

Leave a reply

“Grab your mother’s keys we’re leaving.”

That is one of the lines from Arcade Fire’s “The Suburbs” now engraved into my mind. I know this is usually a blog focusing on visual media, but it’s impossible to pass up a band as revelatory as Arcade Fire.
Before this year, Arcade Fire was just another indie band. Maybe I was just listening to the hype, or maybe I had just listened to “Wake Up” too many times. Arcade Fire is more than that. They are the indie band that is too cool to be called indie. They are the quintessential alternative band of this era, and a remnant of great music from a time long ago.
Arcade Fire has remained in my mind all year for two reasons mainly. The first was their concert at Madison Square Garden, and the second was their latest album, “The Suburbs.”
I have been to very few concerts, but Arcade Fire’s will likely remain my favorite for the rest of my life (that is, unless, someone reincarnates Nico and gets her to perform again with The Velvet Underground). During it, the band came off as totally, totally not pretentious, and totally unchanged by their recent transition into mainstream fame. Win Butler even apologized and offered to start a song over after the drummer screwed up a beat.
During the concert, I also couldn’t help but be impressed with the huge array of instruments in the band. While most bands will usually consist of a singer, a guitarist, a bassist, and a drummer, Arcade Fire has everything from the violin to the accordion. That is why their sounds is always so unique.
Then, there is their album “The Suburbs.” For a while, I was still committed to “Funeral” and was entirely unconvinced that another album could knock it off as their best. After multiple listens, I was proven wrong. Anything that’s truly worth it gets better after multiple viewings (same goes for the band’s underrated sophomore effort, “Neon Bible”).
“The Suburbs” is a marvel of an album for multiple reasons. One reason is simply how great every single song sounds. It’s worth endless amounts of listens.
However, “The Suburbs” is better than the simple label of “good.” That’s because “The Suburbs” brings music back to a better time. While the music of today is focused on the popularity of singles, “The Suburbs” resembles a 1970s concept album. It’s a little more like something Pink Floyd, David Bowie, or The Who might’ve produced rather than something you’d hear from, say, Katy Perry.
The concept album refers to an album that comes together in the end under one common theme or story. “The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust”chronicles the rise and fall of a musician from outer space (or something like that). In a more recent example, Radiohead’s “OK Computer” comes together to express themes of modern alienation and striving to be different in a world that demands perfection.
“The Suburbs” may be even more than a concept album; it’s a rock opera. It tells the story of Win and William Butler’s time they spent growing up in suburban Texas. When listened to in order, it tells the story of lost youth aimlessly wasting time, looking to escape, and then appreciating all of their past experiences.
I might have connected so deeply with this album because it has reflected my own experiences wasting time and fighting boredom in American suburbia. Also, in its own unique way, “The Suburbs” is basically a movie. Altogether, it tells a story, and it must be taken in in order for it to be comprehended at the highest level. Sure, you could put it on shuffle, but “Empty Room” is not the same without listening to it seamlessly dissolve into “City With No Children.”
Not only was “The Suburbs” the best album released this year (no disrespect, Kanye), but it is one I can site as having a major impact on how I process art. Listening to “The Suburbs” has trained me to listen to albums as a whole rather than in parts. Full, sequential stories can be even better than tiny parts that don’t connect. Maybe this is why I’ve grown up to be a film critic.
Check out my first review of “The Suburbs.”
Here are a few of my favorite Arcade Fire Songs:

Movie Review: The Kids Are All Right

2 Replies

Face it, all romantic films turn out the same. In that light, it doesn’t matter what happens in the end, but rather how you get to that end point. That could include the events that occur throughout the film, or the larger context in which those events happen. In a world where romance seems dead, “The Kids Are All Right” is there to kick that notion right in the butt.

As much as people like to make fun of where the Indie genre has gone, give it credit for continuing to make common ideas seem fresh. “The Kids Are All Right” is a mixture of suburban boredom with teen angst and sexual confusion. The centerpiece couple is lesbians Nic (Annette Benning) and Jules (Julianne Moore). Nic takes on the uptight parent role, while Jules is more open-minded. However, they are both equally motherly.

Jules and Nic have two children: the brainy and sexually repressed Joni (Mia Wasikowska) and the just plain confused Laser (Josh Hutcherson). After discovering their origins, the two become curious about who their real father is. They find out he is a semi-hippie named Paul (Mark Ruffalo). Despite being a college dropout, Paul now runs a successful organic farming business and restaurant. The kids meet Paul, and they get along quite well. Something about Paul might seem strange, but Ruffalo’s constantly calm and always reassuring voice quells all fears.

The rest of “The Kids Are All Right” is one of those films whose story doesn’t stem off of a major event but rather a person. Every action that happens in the rest of the film happens as a direct result of the family’s contact with Paul.

“The Kids Are All Right” goes at two contradicting paces. First off, it goes slow. It takes its time and enjoys itself while doing so. At the same time, it feels so energetic and lively. Even if you can feel the running time, you’ll never feel bored. The film definitely chews up the beautiful Southern California scenery.

The music that director Lisa Cholodenko chose also fits in perfectly. The film’s opening track is Vampire Weekend’s “Cousins.” I am usually irked when films use recent, popular music. It can feel like they’re just capitalizing off of something popular rather than actually choosing the right songs. However, “Cousins” is well chosen. It projects both a strangely happy mood as well as a sense of the twisted family troubles on the horizon.

Once again, “The Kids Are All Right” doesn’t contain the lightning-fast storytelling common place in most films made today. Even though I could definitely feel every moment, I would’ve been fine with sitting in the theater for another two hours with these characters. That’s what good storytelling does: it puts you into a convincing universe and lets you out whenever it damn well feels like letting you out. “The Kids Are All Right” ended where it wanted to end because it earned the right to.

This film contains an ensemble worthy of a SAG Award. Benning shows so many flared up, mixed emotions both through her words and even more powerfully, body expressions. Moore is a powerhouse of warmth and motherly humor. Then there’s also Wasikowska. I thought she showed potential in “Alice in Wonderland,” but she just needed a project that was actually, well, good. After “The Kids Are All Right,” she has proven herself ready to take on even more challenging roles.

Along with great acting, “The Kids Are All Right” certainly has one of the best screenplays this year. It’s so insightful and downright hilarious. It embraces awkwardness at all the right moments.

But beyond its witty and thoughtful dialogue there lies something within the film that is almost groundbreaking. For one of the first times, a gay couple was portrayed just like any other couple would be portrayed. The film so truthfully shows what it would feel like to have two moms. That opening dinner scene felt so unbelievably real in the way the characters interact with each other. The “L word” isn’t in site at any point. In an ever troublesome world, “The Kids Are All Right” is a sign of the times that actually makes me feel good about the time I’m growing up in.

Even though you know where the makers of “The Kids Are All Right” lean, this film never at one point tries to make a political statement. It is simply trying to tell a good story, which it does quite well. In its exploration of the meaning of family and the troubles of sex, it evokes the best social commentaries of the 1970s as well as such other great films as “Juno” and “American Beauty.” “The Kids Are All Right” proves that maybe the kids will turn out all right. Hopefully, more movies will follow in its footsteps and turn out all right, too.

Movie Review: (500) Days of Summer

Leave a reply

Ad campaigns can often be misleading. They can make a bad movie look good, and a good movie look bad. Other times, they can make a totally original, breath of fresh air seem like a cliche drag. That was just about the case for “(500) Days of Summer.” All I can say is, the final product totally proved me wrong.

The first surprise (unless you’ve heard anything about this movie prior to seeing it) is that “(500) Days of Summer” is not about a season, but rather about a girl. The film gives us another surprise at the very beginning: this is not a love story. After telling us this, the film begins around day 400 and something. Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is beyond heartbroken.
Why is he heartbroken? 400 something days earlier, Tom, a failed architect who now works as a greeting card creator, meets Summer (Zooey Deschanel). The minute Tom lays eyes on her, he believes he’s found the one and only love of his life. Tom and Summer have very different views on love: Tom believes there’s one true love for everyone; while Summer is too free spirited to believe that relationships can even exist.
From there, the film tracks the relationship between Tom and Summer. It tracks the very highs, and the very lows. It tracks the moments of real love, the moments of fake love, and the moments of utter resentment. And it does all of this in no particular order.
The structure of the film feels more Tarantinoesque than romantic comedyesque. At one point, we’ll be at day 3. Then suddenly, day 188. Day 1. Day 422. Day 57. Day 12. It’ll then go back and repeat certain events over and over, but from different perspectives. Maybe a smirk was actually a frown. That’s something most films don’t do nowadays: stop, look around, and observe.
The film feels like one of those gangster films where a group of failed criminals get together after a botched crime and look back at everything that went wrong; except this time, it’s not a botched heist, but a botched love. But was there even love in the first place? Decide for yourself.
The romance part of “(500) Days of Summer” is debatable, but the comedy part certainly is not. While the film has some hilarious dialogue, it doesn’t rely on throwaway one-liners to get laughs. It relies on small things, such as tiny edits or little facial expressions to arouse laughter. It might get a laugh out of the deadpan way Summer describes her college nickname, or the order in which it places a certain scene.
Every shot of “(500) Days of Summer” is brimming with energy and life. That’s not surprising considering the film is directed by Marc Webb. Before directing this film, Webb was a music video director. Much of the film has the energy and surreal feeling of a music video, as certain scenes will suddenly turn into elaborate drawings while characters churn out giant musical numbers. Many of these creative touches might seem out of place, but they all serve a greater purpose. I can’t reveal that purpose hear; you’ll just have to see it for yourself.
Every step the film took, I kept waiting for it to mess up. I didn’t want it to mess up, but I just couldn’t believe a movie could be this perfect. It was hard to believe that the director and the writers could take the right step at the right time during every single moment of the film. Even though it doesn’t flow in any sort of chronological order, the film still flows like water. And it’s aided at every moment by the anti-chemistry Deschanel and Levitt display. I’m not saying the two actors go poorly together, I’m just saying that this is no ordinary love story. “(500) Days of Summer” is anti a lot of things. Although it is an indie comedy, it plays like the anti-”Garden State.”* That is, it challenges all conventional thoughts on love. Love doesn’t form because the girl you like also likes The Smiths. But, I can’t go into it in much more detail; I’ll just let the film speak for itself because sometimes, the best films need to speak for themselves: “Just because some girl likes the same bizarro crap you do, that doesn’t make her your soul mate.”
Recommended for Fans of: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, The Graduate, Annie Hall, Garden State, Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction
*Note: This comment is not meant to insult “Garden State” in anyway. “Garden State” is a different, but equally good film.