New at BOP: Review: Matrix Resurrections Movie Review: Moonfall Movie Reviews: Scream The #1 Movie in America November Forecast The Many Saints of Newark October Forecast New Trivia Question All site updates Share & Save   Tweet Print this column

Gladiator

The next time someone blathers on to you about why The Dark Knight didn't even deserve to be nominated for the Best Picture of 2008, just remember to tell them that this overwrought, swords-and-sandals epic not only got nominated in 2000, but won. Yes, folks, Gladiator won Best Picture at the Oscars, over movies like Erin Brockovich, Traffic, and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Yes, this movie won Best Picture. Sure, everyone jumps onto an example like Crash as a good example of a movie that should not have won Best Picture, or maybe Shakespeare In Love, but here's the thing: Gladiator was successful enough to help launch Russell Crowe's career, or fuel it, and helped Ridley Scott get to a second wind in his own career. Not only that, but these two men are getting together for a reboot of the mythical tale of Robin Hood and, from the early set pictures, it looks like Maximus is once again starring in a Ridley Scott film, this time with a green tunic. The amount of melodrama in Gladiator is suffocating, as is the general grimness of the film. I'm not against dark material, but there has to be some kind of investment in the material; despite quirky performances from people like Joaquin Phoenix, Oliver Reed, and Richard Harris, Gladiator just never got over its dull and leaden lead performance and colorless, drab direction. And, in case you're psyched for Ridley Scott's next picture, don't forget that he's also got a movie based on the board game Monopoly in the works. Maybe Crowe can gain the weight to play Mr. Moneybags.

Lost In Translation

Have you ever heard about something that, according to your friends, neighbors, and complete strangers, is so amazing that you just have to see it to believe it? Have you ever been so pumped up to see a movie that all of your friends rave about? Have you ever had the feeling that all of your friends may be a few cards short of a deck? Yes, that's what happened to me with the 2003 character study Lost In Translation, the first film that made serious film critics realize that Bill Murray is actually an amazing actor. Murray has been a phenomenal comic actor, but even in a high-concept film like Groundhog Day, he brought a dour, quiet charm to his snark. Though many thought that his performance in Rushmore deserved an Oscar nod, it was his turn as a glum Hollywood celebrity who falls in love with a beautiful, young woman in Japan that got him a shot at the golden boy. Too bad Lost In Translation is one of the most boring (yes, boring) movies to come out of indie Hollywood in years. Sure, Murray is great here, no more or less than he is usually (I even liked him in The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou), but he does a lot more heavy lifting than he ought to opposite someone as gorgeous yet dumbfounded as Scarlett Johansson. It's something pretty terrible to say when Anna Faris, as the starlet wooing Johansson's husband, is more interesting to watch in a cameo role than the lead actress. Many people think of this as a great, poignant, tragic slice of life. I just wish I'd seen the movie they've always raved about.

Continued:       1       2       3