Director: James M. Johnston, David Lowery, Nick Prendergast, Yen Tan
Cast: Rebecca Bustamante, Mark Forte, Harry Goaz, Kelly Grandjean, Jeff Griffin, Grant James, Alana Macias, Lydia Miller, Bill Sebastian, Paul T. Taylor
Release: Coming Soon to a Festival Near You
Synopsis: A unique and challenging collaborative effort from four talented filmmakers, Deadroom is a narrative drama made up of four interwoven vignettes in which conversastions are held between the living and the dead. It is not a ghost story, and indeed there is no context for these otherworldly conversations; they are simply a vehicle for words that could not be said or emotions that could not be felt without the touch of death.

Prognosis: Positive. This film has four teasers.

They’re quick and I thought I would expound on each one before explaining things.

Teaser 1: Strands of hair curl around a woman’s eye and all we see is her forehead and cheek. The woman awakes, or opens her eye, as the narrator talks from above.

“Something terrible happened to you last night. I need you to remember what it was.”

The camera pans out to reveal this woman is wearing a white hospital gown (dress?) as she appears to be in a police interrogation room.

The woman appears distressed as she recounts the moments leading to this moment. Her own narration takes over and we have shots of her face and hands as she tries to answer the policeman’s query.

The interrogator reaches down from the table, pulling out a picture, and asks the woman to tell him what the picture means to her.

A quick flash of a violent altercation snaps quickly in and out of focus.

The woman says she doesn’t understand. The interrogator says to answer his questions and she will eventually understand.

A lovely piano suite takes us to the card that tells us the name of the movie.

Teaser 2:

An interviewer of a different sort, seems like a grad student or a young journalist, goes through a litany of facts about two people.

We don’t know who these people are but as the camera is tightly focused on the man’s glasses, actually the upper left-hand of the man’s glasses, his inner dialogue overlaps snippets of events and happenings that seem like a bunch of gibberish.

The man who consumes this young man’s thoughts eventually comes into the room. The kid stands up and introduces himself to the subject of his fixation.

Really quiet music plays in the background while a card tells us the name of the movie.

Teaser 3:

“Do you enjoy speaking with the dead?”

No one is present as these lines are spoken by a man. He’s very calm, soothing. A yellow room with small grey pictures hangs before us. The camera pans to the left.

“I guess you could put it that way.”

It’s a woman’s voice. The screen goes black.

“Why is that? It seems kind of pointless.”

The man speaks again to which the woman replies about why she enjoys what she does. She can say things that she didn’t get to say before. The screen goes black again as the man asks what she didn’t get to say to him.

The screen illuminates alive with color as we see the two people share a small table. He looks to her and awaits her answer. She keeps her head down as she doesn’t know what to say back to him.

Again, a quiet piano suite plays as a card tells us the name of the movie.

Teaser 4:

Grey room. A man stands at the end of the room which has a single table and two chairs. The man wears a suit and he is adjusting his tie. He faces a wall as the camera pans back to reveal someone is standing behind him.

It’s a woman who stands there, looking at the man. She knows his name and says it out loud. He turns around and says hers.

She’s overcome by emotion and can’t coherently put anything else together between her lips. The camera’s P.O.V. changes to where the man is shown standing static with his arms at his side. The woman asks “Are you really…?” before she quickly walks over to touch him.

The screen goes white and a card tells us the name of the movie.

Hmm….Ok. These are vignettes, from what I can gather. We’re not told anything about why we should see this film. There isn’t any indication of the plot, that much is true, but I think its power derives from when you know what the premise of the film is about before you launch into these trailers. Without knowing the information beforehand there is a perplexity of trying to understand what it is, exactly, that you’re seeing.

We’re introduced to a good number of people, sure, but even though I am intrigued I am not sure why I should hunt this movie out if, let’s say, all four were pasted together to make one long trailer. If this was a movie’s trailer, and we had nothing else to go off of, I would say to give voiceover guy a call and have him say just a few lines. It’s ok to be ambiguous when you know what you’re watching but if I don’t know anyone or anything about the film I need only a few lines for me to really enjoy what’s on the screen and not waste their time or my time asking, “what in the hell is going on?”

I love the premise of the film. I thoroughly enjoyed FOUR ROOMS and I am a big fan of mixing vignettes up with different directors that are all swirling around the same idea; for sheer unique value I would see this film over another nameless film at a festival because of it.

Director: Clint Eastwood
Cast: Clint Eastwood, Hilary Swank, Morgan Freeman
Release: December 17, 2004 (Limited)
Synopsis: A hardened fighter-cum-trainer works with a determined woman in her attempt to establish herself as a boxer.

Prognosis: Positive Quick, what do Milli Vanilli and Marisa Tomei have in common?

Besides both having a predilection for spandex and bad pop music they both found themselves being prize winners in the game of life (a Grammy and an Oscar, respectively) and they both took a wrong turn in their careers after having received their awards. One was busted for lip-synching and the other, well, evaporated from the mainstream consciousness. This all brings us, then, to Hillary Swank.

Apart from having a name that I connote with a certain gentleman’s magazine every time I hear it, I can’t remember the last quality flick she’s been in since winning that golden boy. Is getting the Oscar so early on a death sentence in a person’s career? Sure, Anna Paquin went on to be the object de jour for so many comic book nerds after X-MEN hit (myself included with hands way high in the air in affirmation) but where has Hillary been? Exactly. So, it was with a cautious eye that I crept into this trailer.

This thing starts off with a nice opening shot. Clint is on his knee, next to his bed, praying to the Man above. Visually, it looks dark and the mood is heavy.

In the next shot Clint walks down a large hallway. Hillary walks up to him and asks whether he’s the man she’s looking for. He asks if he owes her money or knows her momma. I love it; the old coot has some good lines left in him. She asks him whether or not he would train a girl. After he denies it once I already know that a) he’ll eventually say yes and b) wasn’t this movie also called GIRLFIGHT?

Morgan Freeman does a quaint little voiceover about one’s own dreams as we see a lonely Clint and a lonely Swank doing their respective things. Next day, new day, Hillary is training on the bag when Clint talks tough about her not being in control of it while walking away from her. Since there’s nothing really progressing with the story (see above paragraph) I watch the way the camera seems to move, the cinematography and how it all affects the environment being shown. It’s all very pleasing to the eye.

Clint eventually relents to Hillary’s begging (obviously) and when I expect to get a high octane soundtrack montage of scenes showing how tough Hillary really as she trains really really hard I’m surprised when I don’t get that. I get a slow montage of scenes showing how tough, and delicate, Hillary is.

The relationship the two of them have is fraught with Clint being a tough-as-crap old codger but there seems to be something else. While there’s a story with Hillary being from a very financially depressed segment of the population, there’s an undercurrent with Clint. Something is going on with him that’s influencing his relationship with Hillary and I’m not sure what it is and it’s not explained. It’s a good thing that I don’t know, and it’s wonderful that the trailer ends as ambiguously as it does.

An honorable mention has to go out to the fact that there isn’t one damn voiceover in this thing and there isn’t a whole lot put on the screen to make us read. Sometimes a trailer like this just glides by on its ability to show how well a movie is put together and it does exactly that. Extra props need to go to Clint for looking as tough and as good as he does. I know the guy’s pushing 97 but, damn, he looks like he could easily take my candy ass in a fight. Good for him.

Director: Gary Chapman
Cast: Ewan McGregor, Jim Broadbent, John Cleese, Tim Curry, Ricky Gervais, John Hurt, Hugh Laurie, Olivia Williams
Release: March 25th, 2005 (Only in the UK)
Synopsis: While set in WWII, Valiant is described by insiders as more Private Benjamin than Private Ryan, following a lonely and comically misfit pigeon through boot camp at the Royal Pigeon Service. Vastly unqualified for the job, Valiant squeaks his way through RAF training and is abruptly sent on the most important mission of the war, charged with carrying key dispatches from the French Resistance to Allies regarding the D-Day landing in Normandy.

Prognosis: Positive. Is it possible the Brits could give an animated feature some more laughs than recent actors like Will Smith or Matt Damon have been able to do in the past few years? It seems with the Japanese and American dominance of animated features that a British take on comedy that could service young moppets and also give adults a reason to go to the theater has been a long time coming. How much, as well, of what seems to work nowadays in animation is its visual appeal but VALLIANT doesn’t seem to want in that category either.

It’s nice that the trailer starts off stoic and plays everything very straight.

A WWII bomber starts its propellers. It stays steady as it flies in the air. Zeppelins, and the rope dangling from them, fill the sinister, foggy skies over London.

“In Britain’s Darkest Hour”

The bomb doors of the bomber open up and the air is filled with black puffs of anti-aircraft fire and streams of machine gun bullets trace across the skyline.

“One hero will light up the sky”

A very stalwartly, British voice gives a speech off-screen as he lets his troops know that they should feel proud for doing their part in this war. Of course, when the speech gets to the end, we don’t see a person but, in this film, the animals which possess great linguistic capabilities are birds.

From here a very jolly British voice lets us know that this film is being brought to us by the same producer who gave us SHREK and SHREK 2. Valiant Pigeon, voiced here by Ewan McGregor, is the protagonist in this flick and what protagonist would be complete in an animated feature without a wise-cracking sidekick? The voice talent of this comedic relief isn’t mentioned but, let’s face it, all Brits seem to talk the same (That was a joke…), and it’s actually amusing when you understand that the target audience isn’t my age.

It could be my predisposition for British humour or a desperate need to have more well-made CGI films out there like THE INCREDIBLES but this one doesn’t irk me in a way that both SHARK TALE and POLAR EXPRESS did. The animation looks more than serviceable, the colors seem in line for the kind of environment it’s taking place in, and who the hell out there doesn’t love WWII movies?

What’s odd about this feature, though, is that it’s going to open next year in Britain without a US date slated. I can understand keeping things from this country. We’re bullies of the world and I don’t blame anyone for keeping their toys to themselves but when France, the Netherlands, and Russia all get their advance date set I just have to question why. Aren’t we all in the Axis of Hey-Let’s-Get-That-Guy?

I do like that this could be one of the very few movies not from Japan that could be an animated import should it do very well. It would be an odd thing to see packs of little kids vying to get into the art house but I’m sure if it did well enough there would be a release not unlike CHICKEN RUN.

Director: Niels Mueller
Cast: Sean Penn, Naomi Watts, Don Cheadle, Jack Thompson, Brad Henke
Release: December 29, 2004 (Limited)
Synopsis: Based on real life events, Assassination is set in 1974 and centers on a businessman (Penn) who decides to take extreme measures to achieve his American dream.

Prognosis: Positive. I’ve really grown to enjoy the work Sean Penn has done over the years.

Be it his Spicoli or his work in THE THIN RED LINE or even the often overlooked THE GAME, the man has it and it’s nice he has enough wherewithal to continually put his energy into projects that have more weight than the collective press most mainstream fare gets in US Weekly and Access Hollywood. (In fairness, his odd appearance with his son in an episode of Viva la Bam was more surreal than anything I’ve seen as of late that didn’t involve a shameless pimping of any film project)

What this trailer does, delicately, is set everything up with cautious precision. With a movie title like this it would be hard to really not know what you’re getting from the get go. However, things open up with Sean speaking into a tape recorder. We don’t see him, but the plastic reels of the recorder unwind as he speaks.

He gives us the date. It’s February 22nd, 1974.

In the next scene Sean wrangles his kids around the front of a porch for a picture before having the shot ruined by being hustled off the property by a woman who I assume is his ex-wife; she says he can see the kids next Sunday. The musical score in the background is morose as is the expression on his face. I already feel sorry for the guy.

Sean then introduces himself into the tape recorder, the messed up picture of his kids from the previous shot hangs on his mirror. He says he’s as significant as a grain of sand.

He sells office furniture.

Someone in the next shot points to a television showing some footage of Richard Nixon as he says that Tricky Dick was the best salesman alive; he sold himself twice on the American population. Sean seems affected by the statement.

Someone at the office starts Sean on a program to help him be a better salesman. Empty affirmations, like the kind you see enclosed in tiny glass frames at a store like Successories, start ringing in his ear.

Naomi Watts, de-sexified in this role, asks if everything is alright at work. His boss then asks him if everything is alright at home. He looks lost.

Roger Ebert gets a long, lingering soundbite on the screen, touting this film’s veracity.

Sean has a problem with Naomi being a cocktail waitress because of the outfit she has to wear. He starts to show a little rage, even begins to spy on her every move, and then, in the background, you hear his voiceover say that all he wants is to have his piece of the American dream. His boss lets him know that divorced salesman simply don’t have what it takes to succeed; the profession is a marriage.

He mentally goes over a cliff at this point.

Sean starts to rant a little more vehemently into his recorder, starts to construct a makeshift ankle holster to hold a big ass gun, begins to plot out his misguided attempt at gaining some kind of life affirming satisfaction, and essentially starts his breakdown.

His last line iterates the point that as soon as he is done the world will remember that he was there and that no one will ever forget his presence.

This is the kind of movie that warrants penciling into a day planner.

Director: Walter Salles
Cast: Jennifer Connelly, Ariel Gade, Shelley Duvall, Perla Haney-Jardine, Camryn Manheim, Pete Postlethwaite, John C. Reilly, Tim Roth, Dougray Scott
Release: August, 2005
Synopsis: A mother and daughter, still wounded from a bitter custody dispute, hole up in a run-down apartment building. Adding further drama to their plight, they are targeted by the ghost of former resident.

Prognosis: Visually, positive. Plot-wise, dumber than a short bus filled to the brim with low achievers. Yeah, so this thing opens with a straight shot down one of NYC’s many main drags. I half expect Spidey to come careening out from the side, being chased by the Sandman or Electro, but instead I get Jennifer Connelly and her daughter walking with a hoity spring in their step to a new apartment.

From the first few lines about how they think this new place will be such a wonderful place to live and how they cavort and giggle like they’re all hoped up on Pixie Stix you know something bad is about to happen.

With drab and dreary colors that range from the nasty weather on the outside to one of the foulest looking elevators this side of Skid Row things aren’t looking that swell. John C. Reilly starts talking up the neighborhood school system as mother and daughter take a ride but then the crazy stuff starts to make an inroad. The elevator door closes suddenly after Jennifer’s daughter runs out, John giving chase, and the elevator goes haywire before coming back to where it began. At first you think John has something to do with the weirdness but no, the crap gets existentially weirder.

Jennifer’s daughter, again in the middle of all this craziness, sees something in the corner of her room. On the ceiling there is a bubbling red spot and they stare at it. I’m sure every instinct in me as a parent would not to go upstairs to find out what it is, as Jennifer does, but to pack up my crap, grab a couple of Ginsus from out of the kitchen, and be ready to stab anyone who comes between me and the exit doors. No, the crazy single mom (which I haven’t made a comment but here it is: There is no way I believe for a moment that women like Jennifer are single parents. I call bullshiat on this one.) decides to play Murder She Wrote and goes upstairs and down a creepy than all hell storage hallway. By herself. It’s dark.

A little girl’s voice quietly recites the Itsy Bitsy Spider.

Yeah, also, what makes me giggle is that John incredulously, and without an ounce of irony, says to Jennifer when she says that it seems like there’s running water coming from the space above her apartment, “There hasn’t been anyone up there for years.” Yeah, my Ginsu plan would be in full-effect at that point.

Alright, so the bitch goes traipsing down the hallway by herself (Yeah, I said it. Any chick who actively seeks to get killed this way deserves a moniker half as nice as that one.). She finds out that the elevator button leading up to that floor has been burned off. (Do you hear the signal bells going down the When Should I Get The Hell Out Of Dodge check sheet?) She next, and boy does it get better, she goes to the door of that apartment and opens it herself. The place is flooded with lake deep water. What does she do? Steps inside, of course. Then, later on, three water faucets come on by themselves.

After we’re told that this movie is brought to us by the author of THE RING Jennifer’s kid gets possessed while creating refrigerator art at school.

“Some mysteries were never meant to be solved.”

So, the final moments are just chockfull of water; coming out of the washer, the walls, the windows, out her pants, everywhere. I try to slow down the quick clips, hoping to see some creepy images of ghosts or demons, but all I get is some Large Marge (pre-freak-out) and some kid who looks like he should be playing bass for Matchbox 20. Disappointing.

Bottom line: oh yeah, I’ll see this. I was astounded by THE RING and I will give this one a chance but if the trailer is already giving me some pause about the preposterousness of it all this can’t be good for what the whole movie will hold. Maybe I’ll check out the Japanese version; their versions are like book versions, simply more satisfying.

Leave a Reply