Coming Attractions: Alice in Wonderland

I certainly have been known to get excited about upcoming films. I'm eagerly awaiting the new Harry Potter, and I'm looking forward to Julia and Julie, The Time Traveler's Wife, and Yoo-Hoo, Mrs. Goldberg. I just came across these beautiful pictures from Tim Burton's Alice in Wonderland which will be released in 2010. The first picture of Johnny Depp as The Mad Hatter just takes my breath away -- as did Anne Hathaway as The White Queen. Alice is played by Mia Wasikowska, whom some of you may know from HBO's In Treatment, where she played a precocious teenage gymnast. Helena Bonham Carter is The Red Queen. The promising cast also includes Stephen Fry as The Cheshire Cat, Alan Rickman as The Caterpillar, Crispin Glover as The Knave of Hearts, and Christopher Lee as The Jabberwock.

Review: Every Little Step

Review: Every Little Step

Rating: ***

Nonna's Rating: $$$

Rotten Tomatoes: 91%

Put this documentary on your Netflix list because it didn't enjoy wide distribution and only remains at a few theatres (The Glen in Glen Ellyn being one). The documentary tells the story of (initially 3,000) dancer-singer-actors auditioning to appear in a musical (A Chorus Line) about dancer-singer-actors auditioning to appear in a musical. I am a sucker for dance movies -- probably because I have no terpsichorean talent whatsoever. That muse passed me by.

Features that make this film a delight: 1) archival footage of Michael Bennett's original interviews with Broadway dancers -- interviews that inspired the dialogue in the musical; 2) initially ragged-around-the-edges dancing, singing, and acting that becomes glorious by the end of the film; 3) the professionalism of the auditioning director et al.-- watching them make tough decisions and watching them handle the fragile egos of the dancers with care and sensitivity; and 4) the impassioned devotion to their art that so many of dancers exhibit.

Nonna's Ratings:

$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price
$$$= Worth paying the Matinee price
$$= Worth putting on your Netflix list
$ = Wait for cable
# = Skip it

Review: X-Men Origins: Wolverine

Review: X-Men Origins: Wolverine

Rating: *1/2

Nonna's Rating: $

Rotten Tomatoes: 37%

Let me 'f'ess up to the truth right away. I went to see this movie for one reason only: Hugh Jackman. The reviews have generally been pretty awful, but I thought I'd give it a chance because I'd enjoyed the first two offerings in the X-Men series so much. Unfortunately, the reviewers have delivered very defensible negative evaluations of the film. The special effects are there; there's nothing schlocky about the production values, but the movie just doesn't have the heart and center of the first two films. In fact, my interest tellingly perked up at the end of the film when Patrick Stewart appeared as early mutants escaped to his protective care. The lesson learned is that one X-man does not a movie make: even if he's buff, beautiful, and a good actor.

Nonna's Ratings:

$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price
$$$= Worth paying the Matinee price
$$= Worth a rental
$ = Wait for cable
# = Skip it

Wordle Sermon

As a linguist, I am delighted whenever words are bent, broken, twisted, and otherwise delightfully tranformed -- and especially visually. I can't get enought of Visuwords, the visual thesaurus: http://www.visuwords.com/?word=happy. So, Wordle (http://www.wordle.net/)is my idea of the bees knees. I submitted my first Seabury sermon to the website, delivered on 2-22-08 -- one week after the traumatizing announcement that Seabury-Western Theological Seminary was ending its 150 year run of educating residential M.Div. students for the priesthood. We had no idea about our futures -- all of us: staff, faculty, and students. Since then, Seabury has begun to rise from its ashes like the proverbial phoenix -- solvent and healthy -- with a new mission and purpose.

Click on the image below for a better view:

Review: The Brothers Bloom

Review: The Brothers Bloom

Rating: ***

Nonna's Rating: $$$

Rotten Tomatoes: 62%

I have always loved movies about the long and short con: The Lady Eve, The Music Man, Paper Moon, The Sting, The Grifters, House of Games, The Spanish Prisoner, Catch Me If You Can, and, oh, of course, Steve Martin's Dirty, Rotten Scoundrels. These are only a few of the titles in this surprisingly ubiquitous genre. Unfortunately, however, these films have predisposed us to skepticism whenever we watch a new film about a con artist. We know to take nothing at face value; we assume there is always more than meets the eye. Is a character dead? Probably not. The Sting ruined that surprise for us.

So, offering a new film in this genre is not for the faint of heart. The viewers expect to be surprised. We really don't want to figure it all out. We want to be conned. David Mamet did just that in House of Games. We didn't want to believe the ending. After all, the dead guy gets up, doesn't he? It's all a con, isn't it?

The Brothers Bloom does manage to surprise us -- to con us. We are finally amazed that we have been watching a love story all along, a story about the love of brothers as well as the love of a man and a woman. The director, Rian Johnson, manages the con predominantly through the stunning performances of his remarkable cast: Adrien Brody, not knowing what it is to live a life unscripted by his brother, Mark Ruffalo, a brilliant con artist, Rachel Weisz, a true, but entirely believable, eccentric, Rinko Kikuchi, silent and deadly, Robby Coltrane, a million miles from Hagrid, Maximilian Schell, diabolical and compelling, and Ricky Jay, the perfectly cast narrator.

The film loses some steam in the second half, but, overall, the con works. I'd like to see it again.

Nonna's Ratings:

$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price
$$$= Worth paying the Matinee price
$$= Worth a rental
$ = Wait for cable
# = Skip it

Review: Up

Review: Up

Rating: ***1/2

Nonna's Rating: $$$

Rotten Tomatoes: 98%

A lonely old man and a pudgy little boy travel by balloon-house to South America and . . .

Does this sound like a sure-fire plot for an animated film? Hardly. But it all works so beautifully. As we've come to expect from Pixar, the animation is stunning; the colors vibrant. My grandson Max and I chose to forgo the 3-D version, and we weren't sorry.

The "adventure in Venezuela" part of the plot is great fun with talking dogs, an exotic bird, a marvelous airship, and an evil nemesis. But it is the beginning of the film that I found most compelling. With few words, the movie recounts the story of the meeting, courtship, and marriage of Carl and Ellie Fredricksen: a union marked by unrealized mutual dreams and the sad absence of children. Ellie and Carl grow old together and Ellie dies, leaving Carl to his profound sadness. This story is told directly with the absence of sentimentality. To Pixar's credit, the film recognizes that Carl's sadness does not disappear, that it surfaces from time to time. Carl, however, is not paralyzed by his grief; he moves on to fulfill his and his wife's dream.

Death at the beginning of a Disney film has been almost formulaic historically, especially the death of a parent as in Bambi, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, The Lion King, The Little Mermaid, and Finding Nemo. In Up, death is treated realistically and appropriately for its intended viewers: impressionable children.

Max, by the way, thought the movie was terrific and far superior to Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian.

Nonna's Ratings:

$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price
$$$= Worth paying the Matinee price
$$= Worth a rental
$ = Wait for cable
# = Skip it

Review: Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian

Review: Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian

Rating: *1/2

Nonna's Rating: $

Rotten Tomatoes: 44%

When Max, my grandson, and I saw the original Night at the Museum movie, I went with low expectations. The film had only received a 44% Rotten Tomatoes rating. As we watched the movie, I thought, "Well, this isn't Citizen Kane, but I think it's going to be a big hit." Just the concept of being privy to historical figures coming alive in the night at a museum was enough to win me over. Yes, some of the jokes were sophomoric, but Max, then nine, was thoroughly delighted and I was thoroughly entertained. It was that rare thing, a live action movie for children that adults could also enjoy.

So, when the second movie, Battle of the Smithsonian, was released, I was eager to see it -- even though it again received only 44% approval from the Rotten Tomatoes reviewers. This time, I have to agree with the reviewers. The film, transplanted from New York to the Smithsonian, is a pale copy of the original. The new venue, so full of possibilities, simply offers nothing new in the way of plot or delight. The movie was tired and tedious. Although, to be fair, I must report that Max liked it -- and I do love Hank Azaria doing funny voices.

Nonna's Ratings:

$$$$ = Worth paying the Friday evening price
$$$= Worth paying the Matinee price
$$= Worth a rental
$ = Wait for cable
# = Skip it