Mini-Reviews

Okay, first things first. As some of you may already know, it is pretty likely that the WGA strike will end sometime this week. The new tentative deal is being recommended by the leaders, and the guild members vote today on whether to accept. Most of the buzz is that they likely will. That means, once it is signed, sealed and delivered, the writers will go back to work. If it is approved today, studio film writers could be back at work on Wednesday, and TV writers will go back as soon as the contracts are official (like a week or two). Here's a link to EW.com about this deal. (Links also to E!Online strike coverage. If you want even more, click the sidebar "strikewatch" on the E! page linked and it will have tons of articles to pick through.) In the last issue of Entertainment Weekly, they did talk to several show runners about salvaging this season, and most of them said, if the strike ends in the next week or two, that many shows could get back on the air by April or May, and close out the season with anywhere from 3-5 new episodes (on a show by show basis, of course).

YAY!!!! I am so stoked, in no small part because this means that the OSCARS ARE A GO!!!!!! And that warms my selfish heart more than I can possibly say!

And part two of the ongoing review blogathon. And you know what? I've seen at least 3 more movies over the past week. When the hell am I gonna find the time to write about them? Huh?

• Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street - This is Tim Burton and Johnny Depp's fifth collaboration, and together they create the dark and twisted world of a corrupt England, and a wronged barber with a murderous vengeance. After the lecherous Judge Turpin (Alan Rickman) becomes obsessed with the pretty wife of Benjamin Barker (Depp), he has the barber framed and sent to jail in Australia. Barker returns under the name Sweeney Todd 15 years later to find his wife was defiled and committed suicide, while Turpin has become the guardian of their beautiful daughter Johanna (Jayne Wisener), whom he plans to marry. Sweeney takes up with the wispy pie-maker Mrs. Lovett (Helena Bonham-Carter), the only person who knows his identity, and together they hatch a scheme: while Sweeney plots his revenge for Judge Turpin, he will kill many of his customers and Mrs. Lovett will hide the evidence in her pies. This way, Sweeney has an outlet for his uncontrollable vengeance, and Mrs. Lovett's pies become the most popular in England. Perhaps this doesn't sound like the best subject matter for a musical, but all the characters sing about their lust, the love, their need to kill, and all manner of other squeamish and unsavory deeds. Depp and Bonham-Carter, though not trained singers, have voices suited to the material; his voice has a guttural menace that reflects Sweeney's darkness, and she has a high flightiness that becomes her warm, oddly distant and delusional piestress. There is also room for an amusing turn by Sascha Baron Cohen as a rival barber, Timothy Spall as Turpin's assistant, the loathsome Beadle Bamford, and newcomer Jamie Campbell Bower as Anthony, a young sailor who falls in love with Johanna and schemes to rescue her. There are throat-slashings galore as Sweeney's unquenchable retribution consumes him, and most are of a theatrical nature, but be prepared for some gore, even if most of it is presented in a comically macabre manner. Mrs. Lovett convinces herself that she and Sweeney can have a happy ending, and though we know better than to believe her, there is an amusing sequence where she imagines their life together "By the Sea." Burton has created a dark, dingy, and dirty London, where the people are all unwashed, unkempt, and not innocent. The production design does a good job of finding damp corners, dark alleys, dusty clothing, and films in all variations of gray and black. Depp's Sweeney Todd does not contain the whimsical lunacy of the musical and other productions, but rather portrays a man who lost everything and allowed it to leave him dead inside. This Sweeney does not forgive, does not enjoy his vengeful quest, but rather wearily pursues an obsession that will never make him happy. The end result is rather fun, especially in it's moments of black comedy, but make no mistake that this is a dark and dismal tale.
• Zodiac : This film came out near the beginning of the year, and landed on DVD months ago. I rented it after many critics put it on their top 10 lists and I could no longer ignore the idea that it might be pretty good. I was not disappointed. This story recounts the case of the Zodiac killer, a crime wave that hit the San Francisco area in the late '60's and early '70's and was never solved. I was under the impression that this was a horror film in the vein of Seven, one of director David Fincher's earlier projects. While it does show several of the murders, Zodiac is more of a police procedural depicting the abundance of evidence, spread over four counties, in a time when technology made it nearly impossible for four police departments to coordinate an investigation. We see the majority of the story from the point of view of two San Francisco Chronicle writers, Paul Avery (Robert Downey Jr.) and Robert Graysmith (Jake Gyllenhaal), and San Francisco inspector David Toschi (Mark Ruffalo). The Zodiac was not a stupid and errant killer; we see some of the murders and note the seeming lack of motive, the disguise, the way he changes his patterns. The murder scenes are not depicted in a way that glorifies the violence, but rather it's matter-of-fact approach creates a looming dread that stays with us throughout the picture. As each of our main characters is introduced to the case (the Chronicle writers through letters the Zodiac sends to their newspaper and the cop when the Zodiac finally commits a murder in his district), they each become obsessed with the evidence and the lack of leads. The film documents the progress of the case in time captions as it spans years, driving some characters mad, and forcing others to admit defeat. Much of the convicting evidence relies on handwriting samples and it is fascinating to see how much evidence can't be corroborated, is circumstantial, or can't be proven beyond reasonable doubt. We take for granted in most crime procedurals that a key piece of evidence will be the lynch-pin in the case, bringing the story to a conclusion. In Zodiac, we are given evidence, but remain as confused as our characters, and yet we are drawn in, becoming just as obsessed. Even though we know in real life the case was never solved, the film effectively builds suspense and draws conclusions based on the evidence we review, right alongside the characters. There is one scene in a basement where the tension is unbearable, and at that point we realize how drawn into the story we have become because we react just like the main character, having absorbed the same clues and suspicions as he has. This is a film about time, about evidence, about obsession, about re-working details and facts until they fit. It is smart, engaging, fascinating and deserves every bit of praise it has received. Don't discount it just because it didn't do well at the box-office; this is a tremendously engrossing film.