Center Stage

Center Stage is one of those ‘snapshot in the lives of’ films. You know. It’s like most such films about the struggles and affairs of doctors, spies and soliders (the current fashion for the security state), policemen, police women, ice skaters, figure skaters, skate boarders, street dancers, teachers, musicians… etc. If you liked Fame, this is that with ballet dancers. And, of course, it’s got the usual “stick up their butt” (nice imagery) American Ballet Association needs a dose of street dancing ‘soul’ cliches. You know. Shakespeare needs hip hop to make it palatable, and so on. Again, we’ve seen it before; pick your title.

Blade II

Blade II kinda kicked ass. There were some horror elements that reminded me of Mimic – I’m not big on that stuff – but as the usual vein of vampire flicks goes, Blade and Blade II aren’t that bad. And I do believe that Kris Kristopherson has actually found his niche. A vampire hunter! Blade II spends a little too much time on the drama and the medical details of vampirism – obviously fun stuff for the vampirella-goth crowd – but overall, the action is freaking great. Watching this is like playing Quake without having to think. :)

Kate & Leopold

Film poster for Kate & Leopold - Copyright 200...
Image via Wikipedia

Kate & Leopold is the usual romance. Bumbling male, sharp female. If he rolls over and plays nice, he’ll win her heart. Excuse me while I vomit. If you like nice films about nice men and the uptight women who want them, you’ll like this one. This is every other romance you’ve seen where you could substitute Hugh Grant for the lead male. The bewildered kind of mind that only sees the beauty of the specialness that is you (i.e. her) – the kind you can dress up in knee-length trousers, suspenders, and a puffy shirt and take shopping with you. On the other hand, if you want a man’s teeth at your throat, look elsewhere.

The Royal Tenenbaums

The Royal Tenenbaums. I don’t have a lot to say about this one. I didn’t find it funny. I didn’t find it enlightening. I’ve debated this, but I still see it as basically another naturalistic mood piece. I happen to like (I’ll take crap for this) Gene Hackman, and I like Anjelica Huston and (more crap coming, I know) Gwyneth Paltrow (Shakespeare in Love is one of my all time favorites, though perhaps she simply benefits from being in that one). Ben Stiller’s best role, imo, is still “The Screamer” (a Friend’s episode – the one where he yells viciously at everyone while playing the gentle soft male to Rachel, and they finally catch him in time for Chandler to say, “Back away from the duck.”.). But I kept looking for something in this film and, typical of naturalistic films, it kept promising, but it never paid off. Sure, there’s some kind of psychological resolution for each of the characters, so I can see the point of the person I argued this with, but then look what kind of resolution it is – it’s resolution without real meaning, imo. The incest part of it is certainly interesting, and that should have been the plot, I think.

Ocean’s Eleven

Likewise, Ocean’s Eleven was an action-heist flick we’ve seen under a number of other titles. It’s the usual man out of prison, puts together the old crew, does one last big job, but there are complications plot. They strung together all those big names for it – Clooney (with a pathetic love interest and not much else – none of that style we saw in O Brother Where Art Thou or Dusk Til Dawn – or maybe just so much of the same that it went by unnoticed), Matt Damon (who ached for a more prominent role – Rounders and Good Will Hunting are still top billings for him), Andy Garcia, Brad Pitt (nothing outshines Fight Club for him), and even Elliott Gould (as a wealthy gangster type). It’s a yawner. Heavy on cast, low on things for them to do. They practically stand around looking at each other. I suppose I remember commenting on this film elsewhere, too.