Tag: SXSW 2010 (Page 2 of 4)

SXSW 2010: The People vs. George Lucas

It’s a feeling that nearly every “Star Wars” fan has had at least once in their life: betrayal. But how far does that betrayal go, and is it even fair to call it that? Those are the main questions surrounding Alexandre O. Philippe’s documentary, “The People vs. George Lucas,” and they’re ones that aren’t necessarily answered by the time it’s over. That’s not to say that the fan doc doesn’t accomplish anything, but rather that, despite being fairly biased in its criticisms of Lucas, it isn’t nearly convincing enough to change your feelings on the subject.

Compiling interviews from fans, writers, filmmakers and just about anyone willing to speak their mind, “The People vs. George Lucas” investigates the infamous love-hate relationship between the “Star Wars” creator and his massive fanbase. Glossing over his early years as a filmmaker and his time making the original “Star Wars” trilogy, Philippe jumps right into the fan controversy at the heart of the film, tracking all the way back to 1997 when the movies were re-released in theaters. Though many thought the decision to upgrade the trilogy was a great idea at the time (including those who actually worked on it), the reissues have since been a major sticking point in the argument against Lucas – and not just because of the changes made. Granted, the whole Han Shot First debacle is pretty maddening stuff, but there are far more intellectual discussions as well, ranging from the validity of an Oscar for Best Visual Effects after the crew’s miniature work was replaced with CG, to the ridiculous claim that the original negative was destroyed after the reissues were completed.

the_people_vs_george_lucas

For as angry as the 1997 editions made fans, however, nothing comes even remotely as close to the outrage following the release of the new trilogy. Though “The Phantom Menace,” in particular, isn’t quite as bad as some made it out to be, expectations were set so high that it’s understandable why a lot of fans took it personally. The pro-Lucas side argues that the films were made for children (just like the first movies were), and though that sounds like a pretty bad excuse for a character as heinous as Jar Jar Binks, it actually has some value to it. After all, if the “Star Wars” movies weren’t made for kids, then why invest so much of the marketing into cartoons and toys? That doesn’t really explain why he would tamper with the mythology of the series (i.e. midi-chlorians), and while some have been able to look past those minor annoyances, others have made it their mission to complain about everything Lucas has done to ruin their childhood.

Philippe’s documentary also includes brief segments about the “Star Wars Christmas Special,” the endurance of the “Star Wars” brand, as well as the negative response to “Indiana Jones & the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.” One interviewee even makes a curious observation regarding the attack on the film, noting that fans lashed out mostly at Lucas, despite Steven Spielberg’s heavy involvement in the project. So is Lucas just the guy we love to hate, or is there something more to it? Philippe doesn’t seem to know the answer, but that’s mostly because there isn’t one. While the argument over whether or not George Lucas owns the creative right to alter his movies (or if he surrenders that right the minute it’s released to the masses) will probably go on long after he’s dead, it’s silly to think that he’s somehow ruined our childhoods. After all, none of us would even have those memories if it weren’t for Lucas, and though he can be a real son of a bitch at times, it’s probably just easier to let him have his way.

SXSW 2010: Elektra Luxx

It’s only been a year since the premiere of the micro-budget comedy, “Women in Trouble,” but that hasn’t stopped director Sebastian Gutierrez from rushing out the second installment in his proposed trilogy just in time for its anniversary. There wasn’t a whole lot of outcry for a sequel, but considering just how fast and cheap these movies are to make, there probably wasn’t any time to wait around to find out. Unfortunately, while “Women in Trouble” featured a series of fun interconnected stories anchored by a clever script and strong performances from its mostly female cast, “Elektra Luxx” only offers a sliver of what made the first movie one of 2009’s underrated gems.

Picking up weeks after the events of “Women in Trouble,” the film opens with adult film star Elektra Luxx (Carla Gugino) still coping with the news that she’s pregnant. Now teaching a class on on making love like a porn star at the local community center, Elektra’s life is complicated once again when Cora (Marley Shelton) arrives in town with a proposition: help ease her guilty conscience by sleeping with her fiancé (Justin Kirk), and in return, she’ll give Elektra the lost lyrics of her late boyfriend, Nick Chapel (Josh Brolin). On the other side of town, porn blogger Bert Rodriguez (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) mourns Elektra’s exit from the adult film industry, only to be horrified to discover his sister (Amy Rossof) is interested in breaking in to the business, while Bambi Emmanuelle Chriqui) and Holly (Adrianne Palicki) head to Mexico for vacation.

electra_luxx

To say that either plotline is integral to Elektra’s story would be pushing it, however, because while they do eventually come together in the end, “Elektra Luxx” isn’t as much of an ensemble effort as the first film. You needn’t look any further than the title of the movie to know that it’s predominantly about Elektra, and although Carla Gugino is great as the blonde bombshell (even getting a chance to show off her diversity playing Elektra’s lispy twin sister in a flashback sequence), it just doesn’t have the same charm as “Women in Trouble.” Only a handful of actors return for the second go-around (including Joseph Gordon-Levitt, whose role has been expanded beyond a short cameo), while many of the new characters, like Timothy Olyphant’s private investigator and Emma Bell’s cheating wife, aren’t on screen long enough to make an impression.

Thankfully, Emmanuelle Chriqui and Adrianne Palicki are also back for more, because they’re easily my favorite characters of the series. Palicki, in particular, steals the show as the lovesick amateur porn star, earning big laughs just about every time she opens her mouth. It’s at times like these where Gutierrez’s script shines, and although there aren’t as many here as in the previous movie, the writing remains his biggest strength. As a director, it’s a completely different story. Though Gutierrez definitely deserves points for experimenting with everything from black-and-white flashbacks to fantasy sequences and musical numbers, none of them are necessary and only take you out of the moment. Granted, “Elektra Luxx” isn’t a bad movie, but it’s still a disappointment after seeing how much could be accomplished with so little in “Women in Trouble.”

SXSW 2010: Mr. Nice

You’d think that a story about one of the most infamous drug smugglers of the 1970s would make for a pretty good film. After all, this is a movie that opens with the lead character comically declaring, “My success went right to my head, and I’ve been living off it ever since.” But Bernard Rose’s “Mr. Nice” is so painfully tedious in the presentation of its subject matter that you eventually lose interest. Based on the life and times of Howard Marks (Rhys Ifans), a promising Oxford scholar who gave up a future in academics to pursue a career dealing drugs, the movie follows his rise to infamy as one of the world’s foremost hashish distributors.

mr_nice

Unfortunately, none of it is particularly engaging, as Rose races through each major event like it’s a bullet point on a crib sheet. Ifans may have campaigned hard for the role (he’s good friends with the real-life Marks), but he’s delivered much better work in smaller roles, while Chloë Sevigny (as his wife, Judy) is essentially a glorified extra. Only David Thewlis escapes unscathed as an IRA soldier who joins Marks’ risky business venture, but even his performance doesn’t always click. The bulk of the blame, however, belongs to Rose, as he just doesn’t know how to make the story interesting. He definitely has some great ideas (the decision to hold back any color until Marks smokes his first joint works well in depicting the importance of drugs in his life), but more often than not, he only makes the movie worse. “Mr. Nice” certainly has its moments, but you’d be better off just catching Ted Demme’s “Blow” on cable instead.

SXSW 2010: Lemmy

Last year, critics went crazy for “Anvil! The Story of Anvil,” a documentary about a duo of failed musicians from Canada so obsessed with success that their friendship eventually suffered because of it. So basically, it was a movie about a couple of self-entitled losers who weren’t really that talented to begin with. It was an interesting study of a man so desperate to become famous that he would do just about anything to get it, but if you’re looking for a music doc about a real rock and roll legend who couldn’t care less about fame, then “Lemmy” is probably a little more up your alley.

That’s not to say that Lemmy Kilmister, the magnetic frontman of heavy metal band Motörhead, is a saint. In fact, he’s far from it. Not only does he chain smoke and drink like a fish, but he’s also pretty open about his recreational use of amphetamines. And at the ripe age of 64, he doesn’t show any signs of slowing down. What’s most interesting about Lemmy, though, isn’t that he’s still alive and kicking, but rather that despite his heavy drinking and drug use, none of his colleagues can remember a single time it’s caused him to act unprofessionally. The idea of a rock god who’s also a responsible businessman may sound a bit oxymoronic, but that’s exactly what’s at the heart of Greg Olliver and Wes Orshoski’s crowd-pleasing rockumentary.

lemmy

Through interviews with close friends and fellow musicians, “Lemmy” tracks the career of the godfather of heavy metal, from his time with the space rock band Hawkwind to a special guest appearance at a recent Metallica concert. Along the way, Olliver and Orshoski take a closer look at the man behind the legend, including segments about his unique fashion sense, his love of WWII memorabilia, and his musical influences. Believe it or not, Lemmy lists The Beatles, Elvis Presley and Little Richard among his personal favorites, and even considers the latter to be the true originator of rock and roll.

Just as Lemmy has an incredible respect for the musicians that preceded him, so do those that follow in his footsteps. There’s not a negative thing to be said about the guy (except, perhaps, from his former Hawkwind bandmates), and it shows not only in the anecdotes that each one tells (Dave Grohl and Scott Ian have some of the funniest), but in the numerous compliments about him, both as a man and a musician. The film’s best moments, however, are also some of the most intimate – a behind-the-scenes look at a man who leads a fairly quiet life when he’s not up on stage, whether its sitting at the Rainbow Room playing a bar-top trivia game or perusing Amoeba Records for a copy of the new Beatles box set in mono. (He doesn’t find one on the shelves, but the store’s owner gladly gives up her personal copy because, well, it’s Lemmy.)

Though it’s necessary to show all these different versions of Lemmy to best explain his legend, the film does begin to run a little long towards the end, as if Olliver and Orshoski had so much great footage that they couldn’t decide on a natural ending. The film has also been thrown together in a very strange fashion, with absolutely no rhyme or reason as to why certain segments appear before others, particularly in regards to some of the more biographical material. Even with its flaws, however, “Lemmy” is pure entertainment. Most rock stars probably wouldn’t appreciate a documentary that exploits their personality for laughs, but the great thing about Lemmy is that he’s in on the joke.

SXSW 2010: MacGruber

It’s been a long time since a “Saturday Night Live” skit was turned into a full-length feature, and for good reason. With the exception of a rare few (most notably the first “Wayne’s World” and “Night at the Roxbury”), they’ve all been pretty terrible. Director Jorma Taccone hopes to buck that trend with “MacGruber,” the big screen adaptation of Will Forte’s MacGyver-like soldier of fortune. Though it might seem like the kind of one-joke concept that couldn’t possibly be funny for 84 minutes, “MacGruber” is so unrelenting in its attempt to win over the audience with childish humor that you can’t help but laugh along.

MacGruber (Forte) was once regarded as the country’s greatest hero, but in the ten years since the murder of his fiancée, he’s given up his gadget-making days and retreated to South America to live in a monastery. But when his old nemesis, Dietrich Von Cunth (Val Kilmer), steals a nuclear warhead with the intention to blow up the White House, MacGruber is recruited by Col. James Faith (Powers Boothe) to come out of retirement and save the world once again. After he blows up his team of former military buddies, MacGruber enlists the help of longtime friend Vicki St. Elmo (Kristen Wiig) and by-the-books soldier Lt. Dixon Piper (Ryan Phillippe) to track down the warhead and pound some Cunth.

macgruber

If you laughed at that last bit, then there’s a good chance you’ll enjoy “MacGruber,” because the script is positively overflowing with that kind of juvenile wordplay. Co-written by Forte, Taccone, and fellow “SNL” scribe John Solomon, the trio does a surprisingly good job of taking a series of minute-long skits that all invariably end up with MacGruber blowing up and expanding it into a real story. It’s not a particularly great story, mind you, but it gets the job done for a film more concerned with setting up the next big joke. There are a lot of jokes that don’t really warrant more than a snicker, but some of the film’s running gags – including one involving MacGruber’s Blaupunkt car stereo and another where he obsesses over a rude motorist – will leave you in stitches.

Even the jokes that aren’t necessarily funny still work to some degree thanks to the film’s cast. Forte is excellent as the title character (just wait until you get a load of MacGruber’s trademark combat move), perfectly towing the line between naivety and just plain stupidity, while Kristen Wiig makes the most of her limited screen time. Ryan Phillippe also helps to ground the film as the straight man of the group, and Van Kilmer, although he doesn’t really capitalize on the sheer absurdity of his character, is clearly having a blast playing the villain. Though it gets off to a bit of a rough start comically, “MacGruber” eventually draws you in with its brand of sophomoric humor, pulling out all the stops in the name of comedy (and the ratings board). It’s certainly not the funniest film of the year, but there are enough laughs scattered throughout to suggest that not every film based on an “SNL” skit is complete shit.

« Older posts Newer posts »

© 2023 Premium Hollywood

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑