Jacob Destree’s Movie Blog

“The Orphanage” (2007) is a smart and stylized horror movie with great direction and an even better plot.

The story centers around Laura, played by Belen Rueda, as she moves with her family into the old orphanage in which she grew up. Now thirty-seven, Laura plans to reopen the orphanage as a home for the disabled, with the help of her husband Carlos (Fernando Cayo) and son Simon (Roger Princep).

Simon is an orphan too. Adopted by Laura and Carlos out of compassion for his HIV illness, Simon makes many invisible friends at the family’s new home. Whether Simon’s invisible friends are the result of an overactive childhood imagination or more sinister forces, you can probably guess.

When Simon suddenly disappears, Laura will stop at nothing to find out the true nature of Simon’s friends, and solve the mystery of “The Orphanage.”

The great thing about seeing the mystery unfold is the quality of film’s structure. Because there ARE ghosts in the orphanage, we ASSUME they must be responsible for what happened to Simon. In fact the ghosts are VICTIMS of what goes on in the orphanage, which begs the question: Will Simon be a victim too?

The ending will surprise you in its sheer logic and simplicity. This is a refreshing change from the horror franchise norm (e.g. “Saw”), in which twist after twist is crammed into the last five minutes, creating plot holes and stretching the limits of believability.

“The Orphanage” is also notable for it’s lack of special effects. The ghosts are not computer generated, the climax does not involve hanging from the roof’s ledge, and there is hardly a drop of blood in the whole picture. Instead, the scares are done the right way: by mixing lighting, shot composition, sound effects, timing and rhythm to ratchet the suspense into the stratosphere. The craftsmanship of “The Orphanage” is genuine, folks!

All this makes “The Orphanage” (or “El Orfanto” in the film’s native tongue) another in a string of Spanish cinema breakthroughs. Director Juan Antonio Bayona and producer Guillermo del Toro, along with other great filmmakers like Alfonso Cuaron and Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, have thrust Spanish made movies back to the forefront of world cinema.

While Bayona’s “Orphanage” is not quite as good as del Toro’s Oscar-winning “Pan’s Labyrinth,” anyone who enjoys one is bound to enjoy the other. Check them both out on Netflix. If you have a Netflix account, either film is available for instant viewing online.

Grade: B+

Is “The Orphanage” a modern horror classic?
Post your thoughts.

Here is the complete list of films from the “AFI’s 10 Top 10″ special, which aired Tuesday, June 17 on CBS. It’s billed as being the ten greatest films of ten different genres, respectively.

Of course, no list by the AFI has ever been definitive, or in my opinion, CORRECT. But that’s why they make these things: to inspire debate and get film buffs talking.

ANIMATION

1. “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs,” 1937.
2. “Pinocchio,” 1940.
3. “Bambi,” 1942.
4. “The Lion King,” 1994.
5. “Fantasia,” 1940.
6. “Toy Story,” 1995.
7. “Beauty and the Beast,” 1991.
8. “Shrek,” 2001.
9. “Cinderella,” 1950.
10. “Finding Nemo,” 2003.

FANTASY

1. “The Wizard of Oz,” 1939.
2. “The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring,” 2001.
3. “It’s a Wonderful Life,” 1946.
4. “King Kong,” 1933.
5. “Miracle on 34th Street, 1947.
6. “Field of Dreams,” 1989.
7. “Harvey,” 1950.
8. “Groundhog Day,” 1993.
9. “The Thief of Bagdad,” 1924.
10. “Big,” 1988.

GANGSTER

1. “The Godfather,” 1972.
2. “Goodfellas,” 1990.
3. “The Godfather Part II,” 1974.
4. “White Heat,” 1949.
5. “Bonnie and Clyde,” 1967.
6. “Scarface: The Shame of a Nation,” 1932.
7. “Pulp Fiction,” 1994.
8. “The Public Enemy,” 1931.
9. “Little Caesar,” 1930.
10. “Scarface,” 1983.

SCIENCE FICTION

1. “2001: A Space Odyssey,” 1968.
2. “Star Wars: Episode IV — A New Hope,” 1977.
3. “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial,” 1982.
4. “A Clockwork Orange,” 1971.
5. “The Day The Earth Stood Still,” 1951.
6. “Blade Runner,” 1982.
7. “Alien,” 1979.
8. “Terminator 2: Judgment Day,” 1991.
9. “Invasion of the Body Snatchers,” 1956.
10. “Back to the Future,” 1985.

WESTERN

1. “The Searchers,” 1956.
2. “High Noon,” 1952.
3. “Shane,” 1953.
4. “Unforgiven,” 1992.
5. “Red River,” 1948.
6. “The Wild Bunch,” 1969.
7. “Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid,” 1969.
8. “McCabe & Mrs. Miller,” 1971.
9. “Stagecoach,” 1939.
10. “Cat Ballou,” 1965.

SPORTS

1. “Raging Bull,” 1980.
2. “Rocky,” 1976.
3. “The Pride of the Yankees,” 1942.
4. “Hoosiers,” 1986.
5. “Bull Durham,” 1988.
6. “The Hustler,” 1961.
7. “Caddyshack,” 1980.
8. “Breaking Away,” 1979.
9. “National Velvet,” 1944.
10. “Jerry Maguire,” 1996.

MYSTERY

1. “Vertigo,” 1958.
2. “Chinatown,” 1974.
3. “Rear Window,” 1954.
4. “Laura,” 1944.
5. “The Third Man,” 1949.
6. “The Maltese Falcon,” 1941.
7. “North By Northwest,” 1959.
8. “Blue Velvet,” 1986.
9. “Dial M for Murder,” 1954.
10. “The Usual Suspects,” 1995.

ROMANTIC COMEDY

1. “City Lights,” 1931.
2. “Annie Hall,” 1977.
3. “It Happened One Night,” 1934.
4. “Roman Holiday,” 1953.
5. “The Philadelphia Story,” 1940.
6. “When Harry Met Sally …,” 1989.
7. “Adam’s Rib,” 1949.
8. “Moonstruck,” 1987.
9. “Harold and Maude,” 1971.
10. “Sleepless in Seattle,” 1993.

COURTROOM DRAMA

1. “To Kill a Mockingbird,” 1962.
2. “12 Angry Men,” 1957.
3. “Kramer Vs. Kramer,” 1979.
4. “The Verdict,” 1982.
5. “A Few Good Men,” 1992.
6. “Witness for the Prosecution,” 1957.
7. “Anatomy of a Murder,” 1959.
8. “In Cold Blood,” 1967.
9. “A Cry in the Dark,” 1988.
10. “Judgment at Nuremberg,” 1961.

EPIC

1. “Lawrence of Arabia,” 1962.
2. “Ben-Hur,” 1959.
3. “Schindler’s List,” 1993.
4. “Gone With the Wind,” 1939.
5. “Spartacus,” 1960.
6. “Titanic,” 1997.
7. “All Quiet on the Western Front,” 1930.
8. “Saving Private Ryan,” 1998.
9. “Reds,” 1981.
10. “The Ten Commandments,” 1956.

For details, see the official site: AFI’s 10 Top 10.

Why do lists like this always rank “The Godfather Part II” below “The Godfather”?
Post your thoughts.

Tod Haynes’ 2007 docu-drama “I’m Not There” is a poetic meditation on the life and career of Bob Dylan. In tone and structure, the film is a radical departure from traditional music biopics.

Haynes’ screenplay accepts as its basic premise, that Dylan’s story is too enigmatic to be summarized in conventional narrative terms. His solution is to cast six different actors to portray different aspects of Dylan’s personality, at various stages in his lengthy career. The characters are given alternate names (like Jude Quinn, or Billy the Kid) and their stories take liberties with Dylan’s life (one of them is an actor, not a musician) in order to convey the shifting nature of Dylan’s art. The actors include both an African American boy and a woman.

The woman is Cate Blanchett. Along with Heath Ledger, they deliver the two most solid Dylan incarnations in the film. Blanchett was nominated for an Oscar for her vivid portrayal of Dylan in the mid-sixties. She brilliantly conveys the alienation that comes with fame, and the pointlessness of celebrity.

Ledger, on the other hand, plays Dylan later in life– after he had turned his back on pop music. His scenes depict the breakup of Dylan’s marriage, and the inherent difficulty of balancing a public persona with a private life. Ledger’s performance is introspective and understated, like Dylan’s albums in the early seventies.

The other performances are good too, but none can overcome Haynes’ self-conscious, reference-stuffed script. He incorporates many allusions to the real-life Dylan which are disorganized and lacking context.

Using song titles as dialogue, for example, strikes a particularly hamfisted tone. In one scene, Cate Blanchett’s Jude Quinn is confronted by a crazed fan with a knife. When a groupie subdues the fan by smashing a bottle over his head, Quinn quips, “Just like a woman!” Winks and nods to real-life Dylan trivia needn’t be so cringe inducing as that!

It begs the question as to whether Haynes’ entire approach is even necessary. Surely a traditional biopic like “Walk The Line” feels genuine (in part) because Johnny Cash talks like a real person. If he cuddled up next to his wife June and whispered in her ear, “I walk the line… because you’re mine,” no one would take the film seriously.

Fortunately, for each such misstep, “I’m Not There” corrects course with a sure-footed step. (Richie Havens delights in a brief singing role, and David Cross steals a scene as poet Allen Ginsburg.) But by the end, writer/ director Haynes has meandered too much. “I’m Not There” offers only a vague semblance of a musician and his art. Maybe this is all one can expect when the subject of the piece is as enigmatic as Dylan.

Yet we are left to wonder: perhaps seeing six different sides of Bob Dylan is simply another side of Bob Dylan too many.

Grade: B

Which actor interprets Dylan best?
Post your thoughts.

Fanboys love to hate George Lucas.

His recent “Star Wars” prequels were universally hailed as inferior retreads despite doing massive business at the box office. Now 2008’s “Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull,” which is also produced by Lucas, finds itself in the same situation.

The fact that “Crystal Skull,” like the new “Star Wars,” is not-quite-as-classic as its predecessors should come as no surprise. What IS surprising is how few viewers are willing to give “Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull” any chance at all, because it’s actually a pretty good adventure yarn.

It is reminiscent of “Indiana Jones And The Temple Of Doom” in the sense that it’s totally made-up, and not based on any religious mythology (like Arks or Grails). This time around, Dr. Jones is out to return a crystal skull to a mythical city of gold hidden deep in the Amazon.

Of course the Russians are on his tail, too. They replace Jones’ classic nemesis, the Nazis, and are led by Cate Blanchett as the evil, sword-wielding Irina Spalko. Resurrecting the Russian villain archetype (complete with bad accent) is the right choice for this picture. Considering Russian bad guys have been recently replaced with Arab bad guys in popular cinema, Spalko and her cronies add to the retro B-movie feel familiar to fans of the series.

“The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull” also blazes new ground with an extraterrestrial themed story. This is a refreshing and unexpected choice by the writers, helping to set “Skull” apart from the earlier films and offer viewers more than mere nostalgia.

Not that there’s anything wrong with nostalgia!

“Skull” works the nostalgia angle, and works it hard. Karen Allen reprises her role as Marion Ravenwood (from “Raiders Of The Lost Ark”), we learn the fate of some classic characters, and old gags are reprized with new variations. (Notice how Indy passes on the nickname “Junior.”)

Unfortunately, a few scenes go overboard with special effects, like when Jones survives a nuclear blast. Other scenes are a bit too cartoonish for their own good, like the Tarzan homage with vines in the jungle.

Yet a fair analysis will demonstrate that ALL Indiana Jones movies have these moments: The giant boulder in the opening scene of “Raiders Of The Lost Ark” defies logic. The rubber life-raft-as-parachute from “Temple Of Doom” makes no sense at all. Neither do the buzz saws, break-through floor, or invisible bridge in “The Last Crusade.”

And yet these scenes are classic, regardless of how much sense they make.

For twelve year olds, “The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull” will be an instant classic. It fits right in with the earlier films of the series. For adults who grew up watching Indiana Jones in the 80’s, try approaching “The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull” with the mindset you had when you were young. Forget your grown up logic. Forget your preconceptions. Everyone, no matter their age in years, should enjoy “Skull” for what it is– a twelve year old’s comic book fantasy realized on the big screen.

The only alternative is to run the classic series through the same logic-wringer you take to “The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull.” And trust me, you don’t want to do that.

Grade: B

Has Indiana Jones lost his charm?
Post your thoughts.