Movie Muse

“Chocolat” sounds like a gooey foreign love story, but it’s actually a fable with classic story archetypes and a hint of magic, all of which finishes pleasantly with a tender morsel — err, moral.

It’s about as sophisticated as chocolate, which is not very sophisticated, so “Chocolat” is as easily digested as it is open to criticism for a lack of heady drama. Nominated for five Oscars, one would think it dwells in intellectual territory, but “Chocolat” comes from the heart — and possibly the stomach. “The Cider House Rules” director Lasse Hallstrom sees these charms and wisely makes them the focal point of this likable film. Read the rest of this entry »

“Marley & Me” does not prey entirely on our soft side for dogs, nor does it aim for laughs caused by animal hi-jinx. It’s a touching film with a warm spirit that manages to shake off any tearjerker stereotypes that most people would be quick to slap it with. That’s better than at least 75 percent of current films with the labels “romance” and “comedy” associated with them. Read the rest of this entry »

I was surprised to learn that “Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day” was based on Winifred Watson’s novel. That’s because it feels so much like a play. It wears all the charms of a play or musical with a high-society cast of people involved in music or theatre and whimsical characters bearing distinctive traits. Even our titular character experiences a 24-hour Cinderella-style transformation using the classic rags-to-riches archetype so often found on the stage. Read the rest of this entry »

Brave are the filmmakers who go out and try to capture the plight of the middle class, aka relationship drama. James L. Brooks’ “Broadcast News” is a romance twisted up with a career that’s all about constantly proving yourself and rising to the top. In reality, it’s just co-worker romance with the heated pressure of a field where selling yourself and journalism ethics don’t always play nice. Brooks soundly portrays this corner of Americana despite the film’s minimal conflict, which comes with trying to make a film about reality. Read the rest of this entry »

As a movie-lover, I had to see what all the fuss was about, so I watched “Twilight” despite minimal knowledge of Stephenie Meyer’s books. I didn’t like it, but felt it could be done better, so with Catherine Hardwicke switched out for Chris Weitz, I decided to see if the franchise could back-up its hundreds of millions in revenue earned from “The Twilight Saga: New Moon.” Weitz improves the action, but the romance is maybe even worse and the story still all over the place. Read the rest of this entry »

Side Note: Check out the next Julie Powell of Chicago cuisine, my friend Stephanie, and her  blog “Stephanie Eats Chicago.” She was featured on WGN Radio this morning, plus if you click you might find pictures of puppies amidst her food-pegs.

“Julie & Julia” is not about food so much as it is about setting goals and creating opportunities for personal achievement. In this way, famous television chef Julia Child (Meryl Streep) and foodie blogger Julie Powell (Amy Adams) have more in common than a passion for cooking. Acclaimed romantic comedy filmmaker Nora Ephron juxtaposes both womens’ stories to illustrate this in her film and though it’s a conclusion that doesn’t require two long hours to cook, the life-like ups and downs and feel good moments of “Julie & Julia” make it an affecting and personable film. Read the rest of this entry »

The ’60s was the decade of the movie musical with “West Side Story,” “The Sound of Music,” “My Fair Lady,” and “Oliver!” all taking home Best PIcture. It’s fair to say “Funny Girl” might’ve been on that list had it not came out the same year as “Oliver!” But the Academy had it right in giving this musical romantic comedy’s one Oscar to its best attribute and greatest asset: Barbara Streisand. Read the rest of this entry »

I come from the group that has never read the Stephenie Meyer books and knew little about them other than the general idea of love and vampires and such. I had put off watching “Twilight” based on reviews, what I heard and my gender, but finally — nearly a year later — gave in to my curiosity over what the craze is all about.

Now, I understand it. I don’t like it, but I understand it. “Twilight” and the book it’s based on is romance — melodramatic dialogue-filled romance about dangerous/forbidden love, something that’s been a major literary force for centuries. Combine that with human infatuation with vampires and there’s perfect reason for “Twilight” to be a success. Read the rest of this entry »

If there was an ultimate and absolute antonym for “Moulin Rouge!” it would be the adjective “shy.” Hundreds of gorgeous costumes, lavish studio sets, a digitally reproduced city of Paris and an abrupt and cartoonish comedic style make this movie musical a one-of-a-kind spectacle.

From the very first musical mash-up number in the Moulin Rouge club that consists of around five songs, two of which are Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit” and “Diamonds Are A Girl’s Best Friend,” you get a sense that “Moulin Rouge!” wants desperately to be different and ultimately unforgettable. The initial gut reaction to the film’s camp and genre- butchering is to dismiss it as forced and unnatural, but once the recycled albeit powerful love story takes over, the derring-do of Baz Luhrmann’s visually striking show becomes much more easily appreciate.

Despite a mix of songs that defies the historical context, “Moulin Rouge!” takes place in turn-of-the-century Paris in the “underground,” inspired by the paintings of Toulouse- Lautrec of the burlesque dancers, courtesans and Absinthe-drinkers. Christian (McGregor) is a hopeless romantic poet whose talent earns him a shot to convince the most famous dancer/performer/courtesan, Satine (Kidman), and her manager/pimp, Harold Zidler (Broadbent) at the city’s most famous club, the Moulin Rouge, to let him create the show that will turn Satine into a star. At the same time, a wealthy Duke (Roxburgh) is funding the show and one of his conditions is for Satine to be his.

“Moulin Rouge!” is also not shy about love or letting you know its themes are love and everything to do with love and that it’s all that matters in life. If not for Kidman’s wonderful performance as a morally conflicted woman dealing with masculine pressures and discovering love is indeed possible, one could make the case that the focal relationship between her and Christian around which the rest of the film blooms might never even begun to ripen.

Christian, after all, is a one-dimensional character seeing as he’s motivated only by Satine and true love — he has no other desires. So as Satine falls for him and his incredible ability to steal the material of famous songwriters decades after his lifetime and perform it with a soaring tenor, something must ground the film, and her very real issues, which are inspired by a combination of famous story lines including “La Boheme” and “La Traviata,” do the trick.

Then there’s Luhrmann’s (1996′s “Romeo + Juliet”) influences on the film. As it progresses, we begin to love his work here more and more. As the plot thickens and turns for the dramatic (and convincingly so despite so much early antics), his lightning-fast editing choices and lighting become even more effective and the musical numbers being fashioned out of a wide array of songs (like Sting’s “Roxanne” mixed with original tango music) become all the more impressive.

Sweeping zoom-ins of a city done all by computer and music numbers that are shot and choreographed in an all too showtune-y manner go from questionable choices to beautiful ones as Luhrmann’s twist on a classic love story archetypes matures before our eyes and the true spirit of his film becomes clearer. There are still some goofy elements that don’t fit, but the spontaneity of song and its often times non-traditional use is one of the biggest things to make sense and fit Luhrmann’s vision with time.

Despite only one original song in “Come What May,” (which should have been allowed to contend for an Oscar) it’s more the placement of the songs, the way they follow traditional musical theater rules for song placement — either setting the mood and foreshadowing the story or expounding on the characters’ inner feelings at appropriate times — makes them so effective.

Similar can be said of “Moulin Rouge!” on the whole: though there’s an inherent abruptness, randomness and even a faux quality to much of the film, it keeps the traditional love story at its core and everything else is merely growing bountifully from it. There’s a reason the same kinds of love stories get recycled in the theater and movies and simply get dressed up a different way and it’s because those stories work; they appeal to something human. So as flamboyant and absurd as this movie gets, it never goes wrong because it sticks to its universal storytelling ideas.

Kathleen Turner stars as a romance adventure novelist who ends up on a romantic adventure of her own in “Romancing the Stone.” Naturally, fans of romance adventures will most enjoy this one, but to its credit there’s a good balance of action to make this film enjoyable for just about everyone.

“Romancing the Stone” is a writer’s fantasy about a writers’ fantasy that comes true. Screenwriter Diane Thomas must’ve been something of a hopeless romantic herself to create Joan Wilder and have her live out a story similar to her books. Wilder is a single woman in her 30s living with her cat who finds out her sister has been kidnapped and that the ransom has been sent to her randomly in the form of a treasure map. Joan flies to Colombia where another man interested in the map sends her off into the jungle instead of straight to her destination where Indiana Jones more or less in the form of Michael Douglas as Jack Colton finds her and helps her begrudgingly.

The film certainly capitalizes on the popularity of “Raiders of the Lost Ark” only targeting itself at women. Joan is a naive and hopeless beauty-in-waiting and Douglas the rebellious adventurer who helps her for initially selfish reasons that turn into romantic ones. Their chemistry is a bit forced, but each fits perfectly into his/her role that we easily approve.

From an action sense, director Robert Zemeckis, in his first major film, keeps the film light but suspenseful enough to keep our interest. Considering the writing calls for cat and mouse the entire time as Joan and Jack run from the corrupt the Colombian police officer Zolo and his men as well as Danny DeVito, a lot hinges on Zemeckis’ creativity to keep the constantly recycling scenes of fleeing from gunfire feel more pressing each time until the climax. He also brings a healthy sense of humor that makes the movie easier to enjoy, knowing that even its maker wants this to be nothing but light-hearted entertainment.

“Romancing” is predictable adventure with even more predictable romance, but Zemeckis finds a way to make it inherently more likable than even Turner or Douglas as talents do. In a film where there would be plenty to role our eyes at, Zemeckis graciously spares us the trouble.