It happens all the time…

Special thanks to Alex Hillman, Brad Graham, Kristin Garrity, Kevin Smokler, Scott Robin, Kevin Lawver and C.C. Chapman for sharing their cautionary tales.

Update: The Jeff with Scott is Jeff Skinner.  Thanks to him as well.

So these three are the last three I was able to catch as the flu conspired to trim my movie-going even further. I know. Excuses, excuses. Still, I have some important things to tell you about:

The Hurt Locker

After you do enough annual top ten lists you start to have a sixth sense for what films are secretly wrangling for a spot in the back of your brain before you even begin making those considerations. For me, The Hurt Locker is the first one for 2009.

With an economy that belies its 130 minute run time, director Kathryn Bigelow’s breakthrough (I knew she had potential, but damn) tells the story of three bomb defusers in Iraq. That’s it. There’s no twisted plot. There doesn’t need to be. The episodes depicted contain enough tension and misery to place this in the upper echelons of war films, period, much more Iraq War films which, to date, has been a pretty sorry lot (not counting docs – there are a ton of good Iraq docs).

I would say it’s incidental that the film takes place in Iraq, but the dynamics of urban warfare in the 21st century add a particular flavor of intensity. The death-can-come-at-any-moment thing gets heightened when you don’t know if that guy standing over there is trying to kill you or just making a call on his cell phone. To put a finer point on it, you don’t know if you should kill that guy standing over there who may just be making an innocent call on his phone.

All of the performances here are knockout, which is key since you come to care for these characters deeply and wonder on an almost minute-by-minute basis if they’re going to be alive in the next frame. Jeremy Renner in particular (whom you might recognize as the bad guy in S.W.A.T. but, if you’re me, will always be that bad-ass vampire that Angel sired in Season One of Angel) turns in – I’ll say it – an Oscar-caliber performance as Staff Sergeant James, who begins as a bit of the “guy who takes crazy risks” cliché but quickly becomes a very sad, very compelling portrait of the strange, needy relationship men can have with war.

Surveillance

Two investigators (Bill Pullman and Julia Ormond) look into a series of grisly murders in middle-of-nowhere USA. Good premise, except I figured out the Big Spoiler about ten minutes in.

That’s not all co-writer/director Jennifer Chambers Lynch (daughter of David) has up her sleeve, however. The film’s most disturbing moments come from the actions of two of the police officers involved (Kent Harper and French Stewart). They pass the time by harassing passing motorists. And by harassing I mean destruction of property, robbery and borderline sexual assault. The actions of the killers seem, oddly, a shade more humane by comparison. They were never tasked with “serve and protect,” so it’s not as disappointing when they don’t.

The film sets up this dichotomy, but never really explores it, which is also a little disappointing.

Oh, this is also one of the few times you’ll ever hear yourself saying “That scene with French Stewart and Cheri Oteri just creeped me the fuck out.”

Il Divo

What is it about Italian crime lords that makes for great cinema? In this case the crime lord in question is actually a politician, the real life Giulio Andreotti, a seven-time prime minister and senator-for-life in Rome for the past few decades who, during that time, has been connected (just not in a prosecutable way) to every illegal activity, um, ever.

Toni Servillo turns in a stellar performance as Andreotti, who is not what you’d expect. Instead of Michael, or even Vito Corleone, picture an Italian Henry Kissinger. Very closed off. Very witty. Not at all violent (he outsources that shit). And, as the movie wears on, very conflicted. In a scene that essentially serves as his confession, he breaks his reserve for one moment to defend what he believes is evil in the service of good.

Writer/Director Paolo Sorrentino is one to watch (actually he’s been at this since ’98, so I’m late to the party). Holy crap. In the first hour of this film he manages to evoke Scorsese, Woo, Leone and, more often than not, Wes Anderson without once seeming derivative.

By the end of the film, though, things do drag a bit. Part of this is due to the fact that the fall of a criminal organization is inevitably less entertaining than the “Hey, everything’s awesome!” phase. Still, a must see.

Photos courtesy of Kristy Duncan

So at the Bigg Digg Shindigg (missed the actual Diggnation ep) there was this big line leading up to this table. Kevin Rose and Alex Albrecht were at the other end of the party, so I don’t really know why people were lined up.

After a while the line had dispersed a bit, so we decided to try a social experiment. If I just sat at the table and started signing stuff, would anyone come up? Kev got the ball rolling.

Right after him, some guy I’d never met asked me to sign his poster and I did. “Dear Phil, Keep on Truckin’! -Dave” I did not pretend to be from Diggnation or anything. He seemed happy.

I’m not sure what’s going on here. Still at the Digg party.

In this photo, I attempt to steal both a chair and a Canadian. Good times.

And here I attempt to steal a chair for little Kiran. The times they are a-changin’.

I also went to panels and shit. I’ll link to that later.

People love them some auto smashy-smashy. Seriously, there are some bona fide summer blockbusters that will weep for not coming close to Furious‘ opening.

4/10

Wide

HANNAH MONTANA: THE MOVIE

WHAT’S THE PITCH?
Miley Stewart (Miley Cyrus, how did I not figure that out?) goes home to ponder whether or not to give up her Hannah Montana alter ego. Kind of like Superman 2, but without Zod.

WILL IT SUCK?
Got nothing for or against Hannah. On the other hand, the fact that this is coming from the director of Serendipity and Shall We Dance does not inspire me with confidence. Oh, and Tyra Banks is in there somewhere, too. This is a problem.

HOW WELL WILL IT DO?
You read the title, right? $81mil.

OBSERVE AND REPORT

WHAT’S THE PITCH?
Funnier, darker Paul Blart: Mall Cop

WILL IT SUCK?
From Foot Fist Way writer/director Jody Hill, so expect the awkward. Early buzz has this as a dark turn for Seth Rogen. And that it’s good. Also starring Ray Liotta, Michael Pena, Anna Faris, Dan Bakkedahl, Aziz Ansari, Patton Oswalt and Danny McBride.

HOW WELL WILL IT DO?
No trouble from low-opening Adventureland but probably a little bleed from the Crank sequel next week – and absolutely nothing to fear from Hannah Montana. $51mil.

DRAGONBALL EVOLUTION

WHAT’S THE PITCH?
People try to make it through an entire film without giggling every time they say “dragonballs”.

WILL IT SUCK?
Getting for a moment past the Justin Chadwin as Roku (!?) confuzzlement, it is nice to see Chow Yun Fat and James Marsters up in here – and that’s where it ends. Early buzz is horrible.

HOW WELL WILL IT DO?
Dude, if you can’t even rally your fan base… $9mil.

Limited

ANVIL! THE STORY OF ANVIL

WHAT’S THE PITCH?
True life Spinal Tap

WILL IT SUCK?
Early buzz is outstanding. Won some awards on the festival circuit.

HOW WELL WILL IT DO?
Word of mouth should be no problem. The interesting challenge will be to see how effectively the distributor, VH1 Classic, can leverage their brand to boost awareness. $4mil.

Next Week: No, this is not an 18 Again prequel.

The very name of the Philadelphia Film Festival & Cinefest is a testament to the wrangling that went into fusing what would have been two separate festivals from two separate factions. Still, you would not have known this for the wealth of offerings, no different than any other year for the level of curating. For my part, a new address and a newborn meant a slightly leaner diet of flicks this year, but there’s still plenty to talk about…

Art & Copy

If Don Draper has given the general public a new respect for advertising professionals, Art & Copy provides a non-fiction basis for those props. Doug Pray’s doc looks at a variety of creative professionals responsible for everything from the “I Want My MTV” campaign to the “1984″ Apple ad. We get the inside scoop on Nike’s “Just Do It” (originally inspired by the last words of a death row inmate) and “Got Milk?” (an exec balked at first, declaring, “That’s incorrect. It should be, ‘Do you have milk?’”).

More importantly, we’re shown the impact of these advertisers’ work on client and consumer alike. Tommy Hilfiger credit’s George Lois’ audacious campaign with forcing him to work harder than he ever had in his life to live up to the hype. A man confesses that he asked out his date to the prom based on the “Just Do It” ads.

Pray reveals the true artistry of his subjects. We assume that an advertiser simply meets the demands of his or her client with no regard for their own artistic oeuvre, but these creators, like any artist, have motifs. Hal Riney (captured here not long before his death in 2008) in particular, creator of the Reagan “Morning in America” spot, invests a little bit of his own childhood yearnings for hearth and home into many of his ads.

What’s more, these advertisers (and I specify these advertisers because even according to them there is a very thin slice of advertisers who work this way) aren’t looking to simply meet the demands of their clients but strive to unleash the potential for what that company could be.

Hunger

If you’ve been paying any attention at all to the festival circuit, you don’t need me to tell you about Steve McQueen’s (not that one) Hunger. If you haven’t, here goes. Hunger tells the true story of Bobby Sands’ 1981 hunger strike in the HM Prison Maze. The short backstory is that IRA prisoners there wanted political prisoner status and the British government did not want to give it to them. This led to “blanket” and “dirty” strikes on the part of the prisoners and increasingly brutal treatment at the hands of the guards.

McQueen’s depiction of this episode is impressively even-handed, if weighed a little bit in favor of Sands. In an audacious narrative stroke, he doesn’t truly introduce Sands for a good 20 minutes or so. First we meet a guard. Then we meet a new prisoner. Then we meet the conditions of the prison. And this is where the term “uncompromising” comes into play in a number of reviews.

Remember the strikes I mentioned earlier? So, part of political prisoner status is that you don’t have to wear the usual prison uniform reserved for garden variety criminals. So the IRA members went on a clothing strike and chose to wear only blankets. When beatings escalated they escalated to a dirty strike which meant that the walls of their cells were covered in shit and piss, the latter of which they would routinely pour into the hallways of the prison. You. See. Everything. There is, in fact, not a single bodily fluid that is not at least implied if not shown during the course of the film.

None of this comes off as gratuitous. It’s presented matter-of-factly. Other traumas are presented in a manner that makes you play closer attention rather than recoil. When first introduced to one of the guards we see him washing his bruised hands. When we see this image again later in the film it is in a completely new context that undermines our previous assumptions. That’s good storytelling.

For his next trick, McQueen basically spends the first half of the film merely setting the stage for the hunger strike, and introduces it with a tour-de-force single take conversation between Sands and a priest in which Sands outlines his reasons. This in a movie that up until that point (and after) has almost as little dialogue as WALL-E.

What you’re left with is truly a jumble of emotions, and I believe everyone will react differently. Personally I was ruminating on the fact that here’s a guy who’s subjecting himself to a state of decay that others have inflicted upon them involuntarily, and it’s a little insulting, especially when it seems he’s fighting for mostly symbolic victories. Why did I have this reaction? In part because the depiction of Sands’ deterioration is so realistic (seriously, this flick is as gory as any horror film you care to watch) that I was instantly reminded of video of starving Africans. Your results may vary.

Of course, there’s the issue of the IRA. Why should we care about a bunch of terrorists? To be sure, the film doesn’t let us forget why many of these prisoners are in jail. We are given a brief (but unforgettable) taste of the violence that put some of them there. But McQueen really isn’t interested in judging. He’s interested in an unflinching depiction of the experience. In one take, he shows us a prison worker mopping up the urine the prisoners have spilt on their cell block. He starts at the end of the hall in the distance and works his way towards us at the other end. McQueen shows us the entire five minutes (I didn’t time it, but it’s gotta be at least two). He wants us. to. feel. it.

Not that McQueen wants to go completely without subtext. This feels like what would happen if Kubrick directed a prison film. There’s the animal brutality hiding beneath a refined veneer. In one extreme closeup we see a guard brushing off the crumbs from his perfectly pleated pants before going to work. And there’s the idea of the elite working out their ids through their underlings (think of the way the ghosts use Jack in The Shining). Here we have the disembodied voice of Margaret Thatcher echoing primly while her policies are carried out by borderline unwilling guards and Bobby Sands and his crew carrying out the missives of their unseen political bosses. It is in fact this lack of self-determination that Sands evokes when he explains his reasoning for the strike, which has not been sanctioned by his handlers.

So if none of that turned you off, go check it out. You won’t soon forget it.

The Sitting Machine

Here’s a truly inspired idea: Take a class of 5th graders and task them with designing and building a functional chair using only glue and cardboard. Self-taught lessons in design and dedication ensue in Paul Hunt and Julie Kaufman’s doc, as do some kick-ass designs. Unfortunately, the whole thing takes longer than it should to get where it’s going, and doesn’t justify its 96-minute run time with any deeper insights into education or socio-economic implications (these are public school students in Lancaster County, PA. Would this same experiment work in Philadelphia?). Even slices of the students own lives, while interesting at first, seem kind of random by the end.

Next: What if they made an Iraq War film that didn’t suck?