geekroad

I am a native Angelino so I have a great affection for Hollywood. It has given us so many wonderful films. But within the industry there is a fetish for a certain type of film that is either about the industry itself, about acting, or about theater. These films are almost always lauded by critics and Hollywood itself, winning awards and praise. But what they lack is an audience. Because no one but Hollywood likes them. They are unfailingly boring, empty and pointless movies.

Birdman is such a film. Happily I did not waste money actually seeing it but read the script after it won for Best Screenplay. I'd already fingered it for a stinker "Hollywood" film but thought maybe I was wrong. Maybe the script would be mind-blowingly beautiful. Maybe I was missing out.

Although I wanted to stop 2 pages in, I kept going. Halfway through the script I told myself to stop the misery, but still pushed on. I kept hoping it wasn't really going to be this bad all the way through. But no. It was. Pointless boredom to the very last smash-cut to black. It is exactly the kind of movie it looks to be by reading the synopsis... or the first page of the script A Hollywood artsy farsty film minus much art and with extra fart. Bird fart.

So if you are tempted to waste money on this film, I would urge you to read the first 10 pages of the screenplay first. If that excites you, you will like the movie, so drop the script and pick up your wallet. If it doesn't, do yourself a favor and watch an old favorite movie instead.

Argo creates a tight, oppressive, pressurized atmosphere that stayed with me long after the lights went up. Affleck plays the CIA operative tasked with rescuing 6 Americans in Iran during the hostage crisis of the 70s. His understated performance is pitch perfect. John Goodman and Alan Arkin are great as the Hollywood counterparts that help Affleck pull off his cover story, and surprisingly the movie has some really funny one-liners. Byran Cranston is also phenomenal, as is the rest of the top-notch cast. While pacing slowed in a few places, it didn't take long to pick back up in each case. A nice touch at the end was seeing the photos of the real life hostages and players juxtaposed against the actors who played them.

The movie was a little different than what I was expecting, however. I expected a "nail biting, action thriller" that I assumed -- knowing how the story ends -- would leave me feeling triumphant or at least feeling good. Instead, (and in a way this is to the movie's credit), the atmosphere it created was so oppressive that I was left in a negative mood, even though the film has a positive ending (since it is based on a true story I don't think that's giving anything away). If you equate oppression and pressure with "a thriller" and "action" then I guess you might see it different. In any case there are worse ways to spend ten bucks plus.

It's a solid 7.5 stars for me, but not a movie I would watch twice.