Reel Projections — Thursday, December 18
December 18th, 2008 by Anthony Salveggi in Arts, Film, News
Austin Film Critics have picked their best of 2008, and guess who cleaned up in the Best Picture, Director, Adapted Screenplay and Supporting Actor categories? JUST TAKE A WILD GUESS. That’s right. The Dark Knight. Fellow Texans the Dallas-Ft. Worth Film Critics Association gave Best Picture to Slumdog Millionaire, as well as Best Director to Danny Boyle for the same flick. Oh, and they also rewarded Heath Ledger with Best Supporting Actor. Read the rest of the winners here.
Meanwhile, the Toronto Film Critics Association, in an obvious cry for attention, have bestowed their Best Picture honor on Wendy and Lucy, which I wrote about in the Dec. 16 Reel Projections. They also gave that film’s Michelle Williams the nod for Best Actress and rewarded Jonathan Demme with Best Director for Rachel Getting Married. And Best Supporting Actor went to Williams’ former boyfriend, and father of her daughter, Heath Ledger. Here’s the rest of the TFCA winners.
Disney has released the first photo of an upcoming Bruce Willis sci-fi film. Behold this mysterious production still from Surrogates. What’s he looking at so intensely off-screen? Could it be one of the surrogate robots? A couch where he can sit down and watch those monitors in comfort? HANS FUCKING GRUBER???!!!
It’s the “I don’t care but somebody out there must” link of the day: Twilight sequel New Moon has a release date. Hoo. Rah.
SPOILER ALERT! Some guy at Chud.com saw the first 22 minutes of Watchmen in Austin, and now he’s spilling his guts all over the interwebs. You’ve been warned. And remember that lawsuit Fox brought against Warner Bros.? An L.A. federal judge has set a Watchmen trial date of January 20, 2009.
December 18th, 2008 at 11:53 am
Reading all these Top 10 lists you’ve been posting, Sal, I can’t help but feel pretty underwhelmed compared to last year’s end-of-the-year wrap-ups. 2007 had Zodiac, No Country for Old Men, fucking There Will Be Blood. These are great, great films.
Sure, I love The Dark Knight as much as the next guy, but a cinematic masterpiece it is not. The juvenile moralism of the ferry scenes, the clumsily-filmed showdown in the half-built tower, the gaping plot holes: I think our standards are just down the toilet this year. The Dark Knight is an amazing action flick, no doubt, but only in a very weak year would it be the most hotly-tipped film come Top 10 time.
December 18th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
I rate The Dark Knight a little higher than you, Coop, and I think it would have ranked high in any year. I was impressed by the moral ambiguities of the film: society’s mores vs. an acceptable level of vigilantism; what we’re willing to sacrifice in terms of liberties and even lives for the sake of maintaining order. And because it plays out within the context of a summer blockbuster, while tapping into our anxiety-filled zeitgeist (with some explicit parallels to the War on Terror), my guess is that paid critics and audiences realized they were witnessing a film that transcended its pulpy, comic-book origins.
Of course, it helped tremendously that Heath Ledger’s performance was canonized by his own death. Who knows, maybe with the benefit of distance, your view will be vindicated, and people will take a more sober view of The Dark Knight, realizing their initial reaction was grounded in surprise rather than the artistic merits of the film.
December 18th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Ledger’s performance was definitely amazing, and I really believe it deserves to be singled out, no question. I guess I just don’t find the morals of the film all that ambiguous. The ferry scene says: “No matter how bad it gets, society will always come through and act decently,” and then when the mega-security cam system blows up, the film without question is saying: “Violating civil liberties every now and then is just fine, as long as it’s a good guy doing it.” What was a dark, complicated film becomes pretty one note by the end, I think.
December 18th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Ah, I think I’ve found the source of our disagreement. When watching the ferry scene, or the surveillance subplot, I didn’t perceive the filmmakers as being didactic. So while you interpret the ferry scene as “No matter how bad it gets, society will always come through and act decently,” I saw it as a deliberate plot device to undermine Joker’s belief that, when push comes to shove, people would always act in their own interests (whether you call those interests “best” or “selfish” I guess is in the eye of the beholder.
Same thing with the cellphone surveillance — I was more intrigued by that subplot for the thought it provoked, regardless of whether it was making a hard case for one side or the other. OK, if you’re already predisposed to believe that civil liberties were inexcusably violated by Lucius and Bruce’s monitoring, then I guess that aspect isn’t thought-provoking at all — it’s just offensive. Personally, I’m not so sure. And to me it doesn’t matter what authorial intention was/is.
December 18th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
I thought the surveillance subplot promised to be thought-provoking, but I think the way it’s wrapped up doesn’t really leave much ambiguity. The viewer is set up at the end to think, “Okay, that wasn’t very cool, but hey, somebody had to stop the Joker.” I don’t find that idea offensive, necessarily, just very shallow.
December 18th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
When it comes to the cell phone subplot, I think a much more accurate representation of Batman’s character would have had him only pretend to destroy the monitoring program, then switch it back on as soon as Lucius was gone. That’s how you stop crime in Gotham, bitches.