Movie Review: The Nanny Diaries (2007)

The Nanny Diaries (2007)

A Lot of Sugar...Very Little Spice

Directed By: Shari Springer Bergman & Robert Pulcini
Starring: Scarlett Johansson, Laura Linney, Alicia Keys, & Chris Evans
MPAA Rating: “PG-13” (for language)

One might expect The Nanny Diaries to be a scathing satire of parents' over-dependence on nannies as well as their degrading attitudes towards the "hired help." You might think this, but that is not what it is. It is an excessively sweet film about a single family, on the verge of being torn apart by adultery and betrayal, and the young nanny who makes them realize the error of their ways. That young nanny is Annie Braddock (Johansson), a college graduate who, more or less, stumbled into the nannying business. The family is Mrs. X (Linney) and Mr. X (Paul Giamatti) and their young son, Grayer (Nicholas Reese Art). Their last name is not really X, but the film plays out like an anthropological research study so the need to keep the identities of the studied subjects secret is necessary.

Over time, Annie (who is not-so-affectionately known only as "Nanny") and Grayer form a strong friendship, perhaps one that transcends his with his own mother. Mrs. X is the type of mother who cut most ties to her son after giving birth to him, instead spending her time shopping and attending various social functions. One might think that an unemployed and very wealthy woman would have time for her single child, but the life of a socialite is perhaps the busiest one could ever live...or, at least, that is was Mrs. X would like you to think. Mr. X is an unpleasant man who is having a rather publicized affair when he isn't out of the state working, but Mrs. X is in denial or just doesn't care. I know I wouldn't want to be around Mr. X either, so it is difficult to blame her.

Much of the film is filled with the kinds of debacles, arguments, and accidents that usually fill these kinds of movies. Food is thrown, people fall down, and underwear is accidentally revealed at the most inopportune time. Fortunately, these shenanigans last for a short while and we soon move into a bit more mature ground. As we witness Mr. X degrade Mrs. X and ignore his child, Annie realizes that the controlling, stern Mrs. X is also a victim of the society to which she thinks she belongs. There are minor subplots that prove to be inconsequential and perhaps even annoying (i.e. Annie's mother who practically disowns her daughter once she discovers that she is a nanny). The film is at its best when it plays it straight, looking at the excessively-wealthy lifestyle through the eyes of a commoner. When it strays away, so do we.

I liked The Nanny Diaries, though it is a flawed film that is about half as intelligent as it thinks it is. It lacks the biting satire and social commentary that could have made the film a step above the usual chick flick. As it is, it is entertaining, funny, and heartfelt...though all of this is wrapped around a hollow center that is only decorated with good performances from Johansson and Linney, Linney giving a more likable and deep performance than her character probably deserved and Johansson giving us a sympathetic heroine to follow. It is perfectly sweet and charming...but it must be said that it deserved to be so much more. There is greatness lying just beneath the surface of The Nanny Diaries...but it is just too focused on being cute to ever realize that.

Movie Review: The Simpsons Movie (2007)

The Simpsons Movie (2007)

Classic Television Makes the Transition

Directed By: David Silverman
Starring: Dan Castellaneta, Julie Kavner, Nancy Cartwright, & Yeardley Smith
MPAA Rating: "PG-13" (for irreverent humor throughout)

The Simpsons has been on television since 1989, which means that it premiered the year I was born. So, I have never known a time without The Simpsons. Never being a devout watcher of the show, the thought of a movie was rather inconsequential to me. However, the effect the show has had on modern culture is undeniable. If nothing else, it changed the face of animation and even primetime television. Now, approximately eighteen years after its television debut, the yellow family and the entire population of Springfield have made their boldest statement yet: moving to the big-screen. Also along for the ride are even more biting satire and political undertones. "I can't believe we're paying to see something we get on TV for free!" Homer (Castellaneta) tells us, "If you ask me, everybody in this theater is a giant sucker! Especially you!" Well, my goodness, he may just be on to something.

We enter the famous town of Springfield (which inexplicably borders Ohio, Nevada, Maine, and Kentucky), home of the Simpson family. Apparently, it is the most polluted town in America, much to the dismay of the young and idealistic Lisa Simpson (Smith), who knocks on doors and hands out environmental pamphlets. No one wants to listen...especially not her own bumbling father, Homer, who is far too concerned with the newest member of the family: Spider-Pig. Homer even has a theme song for the beloved swine, one that makes the actual theme song for Spider-Man all the more ridiculous. After Lisa manages to successfully sway the local politicians to moderate the pollution, particularly in the local lake (with a speech entitled "An Irritating Truth," no doubt), only Homer is brave...well, dumb...enough to violate the probations and dump Spider-Pig's waste products into the water.

The Environmental Protection Agency decides that the only way to clean up the mess is to destroy Springfield and create the Grand Canyon Part 2. Homer and his family strike out to save their hometown. Now, no one goes into The Simpsons Movie expecting a thought-provoking plot...or even a plot that makes any sense whatsoever. This is fortunate, because they will not find any of that here. One can only wonder why a silo filled with pig feces is any more toxic than the years of pollution that had been dumped into the lake prior and why they could not just clean the lake up again...but it never really matters. In Springfield, logic and science have no place...and, frankly, it is refreshing. After seeing two very bleak horror films in two days (The Mist and Them), it was a wonderful relief to see straight-laced humor in all of its politically-incorrect, escapist glory. It is also great to finally see a television-adaptation that doesn't embarrass its source material, instead broadening it and expanding it to cinematic proportions.

Movie Review: Them (2006)

Them (a.k.a. Ils) (2006)

Who Are They And What Do They Want?

Directed By: David Moreau & Xavier Palud

Starring: Olivia Bonamy & Michaël Cohen

MPAA Rating: "R" (for some violence and terror)

Them was a French horror film that took around two years to find a release here in America...unfortunately for us (though fortunately for the French), it is vastly superior to around 95% of the genre efforts that Americans have made. It has virtually no gore, very little bloodshed, and a surprisingly limited amount of violence...and yet it is perhaps one of the scariest modern horror films. It begins rather quickly with a chilling scene of a mother and daughter who find themselves stranded on a backwoods road and stalked by unseen people. Soon, we meet the young couple, Clementine (Bonamy) and Lucas (Cohen), who live down the road from the site of the opening scene. Obviously, things are not going to be merry for these hapless people. That same night, the same mysterious people arrive and a nightmare begins.

Clementine and Lucas are stalked and terrorized by shadowy figures who manage to stay hidden within shadows. These figures, for much of the film, taunt the couple, terrifying them before finally attempting to execute their primary action: killing them. It is a chilling string of events that seem to become darker, more desperate, and more suspenseful with each passing minute. By the end, we can only hope that the film will end so that the terror will stop. No escapism will be found here...no joy, no happiness, and no mercy. This is a real horror film, the kind that seeks to terrify and not disgust. You will see no decapitations, no fingernails being ripped off, no cannibalism, and no unsavory castrations. It is all suspense, but the pay-offs are perhaps more effective for what they do not show than what they do.

Any writer or director who is behind a PG-13 rated horror film always gives the same speech about how our minds are more capable of developing a truly horrifying outcome than any film. I believe they are right, but also that most filmmakers have no idea how to establish a basis on which we can develop our own terrifying results. Moreau and Palud do, on the other hand, understand this. They manage to scare us so badly during the build-up that, by not showing us all of what happens, they create far more effective scenes. In a world of cinema that insists that all horror film must disembowel some large-breasted broad in a short skirt, Them dares to take a more mature, more developed, and more fulfilling route than the likes of Saw and Hostel.

Them makes the rather dull mistake, however, of proclaiming to be based on a true story. Regardless of its authenticity, the tag line Based on a True Story has become somewhat of a cheap selling point that, though once used to develop even more terror behind a project, seems to only make it more desperate. Them did not need such a silly tactic to legitimize itself. The raw, gritty, and unrelenting horror that fills the rest of the film's brief run time is more than enough. Many critics (mainly those who specialize in the horror genre) would tell you that foreign filmmakers have a firmer grasp on the genre than American filmmakers. Had I not just seen The Mist, I would probably agree based entirely on Them. As it is, I think the nationalities of the filmmakers are irrelevant. It is all about the understanding of horror and suspense, rather than gore and violence. Moreau and Palud understand that and they display this understanding here.

Movie Review: The Mist (2007)

The Mist (2007)

The Darkness of Humanity

Directed By: Frank Darabont

Starring: Thomas Jane, Marcia Gay Harden, & Laurie Holden

MPAA Rating: "R" (for violence, terror and gore, and language)

Stephen King is a master of creating brilliant characters and putting them in harrowing situations that involve such things as killer clowns and deranged hotels. In one of his most famous novellas, King uses a sinister mist that is filled with obligatory vicious creatures. The creatures are kept hidden for much of the film and wisely so...because the computer-generated arthropods and dinosaur hybrids only remain scary as long as we cannot see them. Once they are revealed, no matter how wonderful they look, the mystery is gone. But, the horror of The Mist is not in the monsters outside, but in the humans inside. The most villainous of them all is Mrs. Carmody (Harden), a deceitful murderous maniac masked as a twentieth-century prophet from God.

Pitted against her is David Drayton (Jane), an artist who, after a terrible storm, heads to the local supermarket with his son, Billy (Nathan Gamble), to gather supplies. Suddenly, a thick mist engulfs the entire store. Also in the store is David's rude neighbor, Brent Norton (Andre Braugher), a local schoolteacher, Amanda Dunfrey (Holden), and Ollie Weeks (Toby Jones). After a hapless bagboy is killed by massive tentacles that attack the loading dock, the residents of the store find themselves taking sides against each other. As the situation grows excessively bleak and deadly, the once-grounded individuals who had mocked Mrs. Carmody eventually become her most obsessive supporters...and she is determined to offer a blood sacrifice to end the nightmare.

I read King's novella a few months ago...It was one of the best stories I had read in quite some time, perfect in almost every aspect. Needless to say, I was excited for the film adaptation, helmed by King enthusiast Frank Darabont (who also wrote and directed The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile, two other acclaimed King adaptations). If anyone could make such a compelling read into an equally-fascinating film, Darabont was surely the person to do it. Here, he proves yet again to understand King's work. He understands that The Mist was never really about the creatures within the mist, but about the animalistic horrors of humanity. "People are basically good," Amanda persists. Anyone who has ever read Lord of the Flies knows that this isn't the case. "Sure, as long as the machines are working and you can dial 911," David replies, " But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, you scare the shit out of them. No more rules."

The film is wonderfully-acted (particularly from a fanatical Harden who seems to fill the role as though it were created specifically for her) and beautifully-directed. The creatures may look like obvious creature effects, but Darabont has the good sense to keep them masked in haze for much of the duration. The film sticks closely to the short story, capturing the mood and tone of King's work...until, of course, the controversial ending. The ending to the novella was perfect, though it would hardly work for a film. The new ending seems appropriate to a point, though a final ironic and unsettling twist seems to defy the logic set forth by the novella. It undermines the very basis on which King created the creatures, turning them into something a little less than terrifying. Perhaps The Mist would have been best without its new ending, but it's hard to deny just how unsettling and disturbing it is. I may not have liked the conclusion, but the journey...it's delightfully horrific.

And So We Begin...

To Understand the Art Behind the Movies...

My extended trip into the cinematic world has officially begun. To begin what I hope will be an exciting and informative project, I felt the need to tell everyone exactly what it is I intend to do and why I have decided to do it. Over the past few years, I came to the rather disappointing conclusion that my knowledge of film was severely lacking. I had never even seen Pulp Fiction after all. So, at the age of eighteen years old, I decided that the perfect way to increase this knowledge was to begin this blog. I will be reviewing every movie I watch after this date via this blog, as well as posting various other entertaining tidbits (Top Ten Lists and more). By the end of this year, I hope to have at least a solid foundation of film knowledge. Follow my progress exclusively here at the home of the Cinema Traveler!