Midnight in Paris

The other day, I had a conversation with my little brother, who plays in a rock band. Over the phone, he lamented about being born in the wrong era.  He longed to be a child of the 1960s in order to experience the rock legends of the late 70s and 80s in their prime.  Led Zeppelin, Dio and Kiss are a few of his idols and he complains that music just isn’t very good these days.  No arguments there.  When I suggested that he watch Midnight in Paris, to compare his woes to what the film depicts, he seemed less than interested.  He then complained about how movies aren’t as good as they once were, referencing The Blues Brothers and Wayne’s World as the cream of the crop.  We all have different opinions.

In Midnight in Paris, Gil (Owen Wilson) has an idealistic time and place as well; 1920s Paris.  It was the era of great writers, like Hemmingway, and game changing artists, like Dalí and his surrealists.  Gil is a Hollywood screen writer who wants to write, what he considers, real literature.  He has been working, and rewriting and tweaking a novel for some time now.  On a business  trip to Paris with his fiancé, Inez (Rachel McAdams) and her parents (Kurt Fuller and Mimi Kennedy), it seems he has the right place, but not the time.  Nor the right people.

What is most frustrating to Gil is that rather than enjoying and trying to absorb the beauty and history around them, Inez always wants them to go with her friends, Paul (Michael Sheen) and Carol (Nina Arianda).  The foursome visits modern art galleries, Versailles and (my personal favorite) the Rodin Museum.  All the fun is sucked out with Paul pretentiously spouting pseudo-intellectual jabber.  He even argues with the tour guide at times.

It’s only late at night that Gil can get away and have some time to himself.  As most writers do, he walks.  And after midnight, oh the magic he stumbles into is too wonderful for me to spoil!

Seeing so much of the beauty and creative life that makes Paris special makes me wonder how exactly Woody Allen sees it.  Most film enthusiasts know that New York his his home and a majority of his films are set and filmed there.  Is Paris the European equivalent to New York to Allen?  And where does 1920s Paris compare with various eras in New York?  These are all questions of perspective, not fact, and I think Woody drops some big hints in this film through Gil, but is wily enough to make us keep guessing.

Midnight in Paris was nominated for four Oscars: Best Picture, Original Screenplay, Art Direction and Woody Allen for Best Director.

I want to recommend Midnight in Paris for everyone, but especially writers, musicians and artists of all sorts.  The artistic communities all have their great predecessors that we look to and admire.  Midnight in Paris is one of those films that fully understands that and the frustrations we can feel when others fail to.  The film can also help us get past that barrier we put up, believing that we could never be as good as Hemmingway, Dalí.  Or Dio.

“The artist’s job is not to succumb to despair but to find an antidote for the emptiness of existence.”

If The Academy is looking to award a witty, nostalgic comedy with a unique flare of magic, Midnight in Paris will win the Oscar for Best Picture.

Frost/Nixon

To enjoy Frost/Nixon you don’t need to be an old hippie itching to watch Nixon squirm or have lived though Watergate.  You don’t even need to know of enjoy politics.  The beauty of this film is that it simply comes down to a one on one duel and the way Ron Howard sets it up, fills everyone in and gets them all rooting for Frost.

In one corner, we have David Frost (Michael Sheen) a British television talk show host.  He did have a show in America, but now he’s most successful in Australia.  Interviewing Nixon is all his idea, a great way to gain acceptance back into American households and give Nixon the trial he never had.  But as he gets deeper into preparation for the interview, Frost is putting more and more at stake.  He can’t get major TV networks interested in his interview and ends up having to syndicate it himself and foot a hefty bill.  Even more important is can he get Nixon to admit to any wrongdoing, or will the crafty president just drone on and sound presidential throughout the entire interview?

In the opposite corner, we have former President Richard M. Nixon (Frank Langalla) fresh off his pardon from President Ford.   With the advice of his chief of staff, Jack Brennan (Kevin Bacon), he agrees to the interview for the money and because he does not think a British talk show host will put up any tough questions.  We easily see that Nixon looks down on Frost and does not consider him a adversary worth worrying about.  But Frost realizes the power of television.

Langalla channels a spectacular performance into portraying Nixon.  He makes the former president very human and nearly frail with emotions, faults, but extremely cunning with crafty mind games.  Langalla devotes most of his talents to live theater and does only a few movies.  In 2007 he won a Tony for his performance in the stage production of Frost/Nixon, but was beat out for his nomination at the Oscars.  What a shame, I really believe Langalla deserved the award that night.  Perhaps Sean Penn’s speech really summed up what happened in the final vote.

The crucial piece of film making that makes this movie work so well is the editing.  Throughout the film, we’re constantly filled in with back-story and details from present day interviews as the story progresses.  The individual interviews seem to chime in at perfect times, helping the viewer gain a larger perspective of what just happened in the scene.  In the beginning of the film, where we’re filled in with bits of old news shows and historical television to fill everyone in on what exactly happened toward the end of Nixon’s presidency, the present day interviews nearly make the film feel like a documentary, but soon the narrative takes hold.  I don’t know how, or if that idea was conveyed on stage, but on film it works perfectly.

Frost/Nixon is not a breezy film to veg out to, but it’s not so hard-nosed that it becomes a chore to watch.  Howard makes the film engaging and accessible to most audiences while keeping it very smart, political and fast paced.  Even if you have no real interest in Richard Nixon or never heard of David Frost, you can enjoy the film while learning a lot.  It could also be a great tool for students, but with an R rating for language, it becomes a judgement call.

“You could see it in Frost’s face. If he didn’t know the caliber of the man that he was up against before the interview started, he certainly knew it halfway through the President’s first answer.”

 

The Queen

I remember being twelve years old when Princess Dianna died.  My family and I were out camping for the weekend and didn’t hear a thing about it until we got home.  My mom was upset, she might have cried and said that if we hadn’t been out in the woods we would’ve known sooner, like we had missed a friend’s funeral.  I didn’t understand what Dianna meant to my mom, all I knew was that there was a videotape labeled “Princess Dianna’s Wedding” on the shelf and we unwrapped a fresh tape to record her funeral.

First off, if this film had been renamed The Days Following Dianna’s Death millions more, like my mom, would have flocked to the theaters.  But it’s not, because this film is about the Queen and therefore needs to reflect itself in her quiet dignity. 

So yes, the film follows Queen Elizabeth II (Helen Mirren) just after the death of Princess Dianna.  Along with her are the rest of the Royal family and Prime Minister Tony Blair (Michael Sheen).  The Queen and Blair are at opposite opinions on how to deal with Dianna’s death.  The Queen, being rationally old fashioned, sees that Dianna is no longer a member of the Royal family and thinks the memorial should be a private matter.  However, more modern Blair recognizes how Dianna was loved the world over, thinks that a grand public funeral is necessary and promptly address the public.  It seems that once he utters the words “People’s Princess” all of England is full of grief and flocks to Buckingham Palace to leave cards and flowers.  The Queen is thrown by the people’s reaction.  Soon, leaders from all over the world are expressing their condolences.  The longer the Queen says nothing the more hostile her people become against her and the idea of a monarchy.  She starts to question herself, if she doesn’t understand her people how can she be a good queen?

Helen Mirren plays Queen Elizabeth II and receives the Oscar for her grand performance.  Mirren expertly lets the Queen be royal and human at the same time.  She’s not warm or inviting because she wasn’t raised that way.  She’s a real stickler for protocol, nearly stubborn.  But when she hears the news, one of her first reactions is to protect her grandchildren.  One of the main reasons they don’t return to Buckingham Palace is to keep the boys busy and distract them from their loss.

The film is expertly crafted.  A mix of old news footage is spliced into the film at times and shows how the media really contributed to the life, death and memorial of Princess Dianna.  The recreated moments before the fatal crash in Paris are spliced together with actual images taken of her by paparazzi.  Segments of the mass memorial outside Buckingham Palace and speeches by world leaders are seen by the Queen and Blair, prompting their decisions.

This is a film I recommend to everyone, not just because it’s good, but because it’s an intimate snapshot of history.  Most of us were there watching and grieving with the rest of the world, but we could have never imagined the perspective of the Queen.