Flip Flop at Cannes?

Lars Von Trier's new movie Antichrist caused Roger to have some mixed feelings at Cannes. On the day that he saw it he came out with what seems to be a very negative review. He said, "Von Trier's film goes beyond malevolence into the monstrous. Never before have a man and woman inflicted more pain upon each other in a movie." He also said, " Von Trier is not so much making a film about violence as as making a film to inflict violence upon us, perhaps as a salutary experience." He continues, "This is the most despairing film I've ever have seen."
A day later he said, "In the first place, it's important to note that Antichrist is not a bad film. It is a powerfully-made film that contains material many audiences find repulsive or repulsive. The performances by Willem Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg are heroic and fearless. Von Trier's visual command is striking." he also said,"He has been brave and strong, and made a film that fully reflects the pain of his own feelings."
On the first day Antichrist came off as one of the worst movies ever made but on the second day it seems that Roger had changed his mind.
I think that what Roger went through is normal. I didn't von Trier's Breaking the Waves and Dogville when I first saw them. But as I reflected upon them they began to grow on me. Sometimes painful movies are best viewed with a more distant perspective. These aren't the kind of movies that stand up to repeated viewing for me, but they are interesting and meaningful.
I'm looking forward to seeing Antichrist, at least one time.

Chop Shop (2008)

- 3 1/2 Eberts

I had never heard of this movie, but Roger had it as a 4 star movie and then he named it as one of his Great Movies. It is about a boy and his sister who live in poverty near Shea Stadium in New York City. The boy works hard at odd jobs and also works in a chop shop. On the side he steals hubcaps, sells bootleg DVDs and is not above stealing a purse.
His sister works in a food wagon and does tricks on the side. They are desperate to make money so that can get a real livelihood. I thought the actors were really good. They contributed greatly to the documentary feel that the movie had.
It's hard to describe how realistic the movie looked and felt. It was almost like someone with a hand held camera followed some real people around, except the quality of the film is so good.
I can understand why Roger liked it so much. It really is a beautifully made movie.

My Father's Glory (1990)

- 2 1/2 Eberts

I watched another of Roger's 4 star movies. It was based on a novel by Marcel Pagnol who had also written Jean de Florette and Manon of the Spring and had also helped make them into movies. They have always been two of my favorite movies.
I was a little disappointed in My Father's Glory. It was a nice, sweet slice of life film, but there was very little plot or drama. Roger, in his review, points out that it should be seen with its companion movie, My Mother's Castle.
I have put My Mother's Castle in my queue, and after I see it maybe I will like My Father's Glory better. On its own, I thought it was just fair.

The Wrestler

- 3 Eberts

I finally got to see this movie and I thought it was good. It was a tragedy and wasn't an upbeat story. Randy the Ram was only happy and successful inside of the ring.
I think that the movie would have been mediocre without the great acting performance by Mickey Rourke. It is one of those rare films where the role fits the actor like a glove and it is hard to imagine anyone else playing it.
The movie seemed to leave open the possibility for a sequel. I hope not. The ending, with what I imagined happened, made the movie whole and honest. If there is a sequel then it will diminish The Wrestler in my eyes.
If you don't like tragedies, you probably won't like this movie. If you enjoy seeing great performances you probably will.

Roger really liked it and gave it 4 stars. He said, "I cared as deeply about Randy the Ram as any movie character I've seen this year. " I have to disagree with Roger there. Randy was not a sympathetic character. He abandoned his daughter and when he had a chance to make it up to her he went out drinking with his friends. How could their dinner date not be the most important in his life to him? He didn't make it because he was a loser who only cared about himself and his heroic self-image. No Roger, I didn't care deeply about his character. But I liked the movie because it was honest. There are many people like Randy the Ram, particularly in the sports world.

Doubt

- 3 1/2 Eberts

Doubt is not a fun move. But it is very interesting and it it is very well done. The acting in it was especially good. Meryl Streep, Philip Seymour and Viola Davis were tremendous. This movie is well worth seeing just for the acting alone.
The movie is unsettling because you don't know what to believe when you are watching it. But the more I think about it the more I know that Sister Aloysius was right, and she was a heroic character. She was going to do what was right even if it ended up hurting her.
Sister Aloysius is not a really sympathetic character but she might just be one of film's most heroic characters. She was willing to do what was right even though the monsignor and those around her were not. She wasn't going to take the easy way out.
Sister Aloysius wasn't interested in being popular, she was interested in doing what was right for the children. It's hard to do the right thing when no one else is supporting you. It's easy to develop doubt about whether you are doing the right thing when those around you are all telling you that you are wrong. Only a real hero could stand up to that kind of pressure.

Roger really liked it and gave it 4 stars.