Movie Review: Crazy Heart
January 24th, 2010 at 8:37:10 AM
permalink
We got a pre-release version of Crazy Heart on DVD from a friend in SAG, and watched this movie at home with some friends. Lucky us, I would have never paid to see this if I knew ...
Here's the movie. Drunk lowlife country singer "Bad" Blake is at the end of his ropes, without a hit in years, playing bowling alleys and other downscale venues, when he meets a girl. (Blake, as we find out, was married multiple times before meeting this girl). Then we have each possible predictible scene:
The early romance.
The love scene (actually, two of them, one heavier than the other).
The woman wanting the man to change (give up drinking).
The scene where the man endears himself to the woman's child.
The relationship getting more serious.
The first hints at conflict.
The big argument scene.
A dozen other cliche scenes, many repeating the themes above.
I annoyed my friends by enumerating these expected plot points before the main part of the movie got going, and checking them off as the movie got there.
The questions are, does the drunk redeem himself and get the girl, or does he continue his downward spiral? And if he redeems himself, is that by itself enough to get her. If he continues his downward spiral, is there anything that can save him? Is any of this pain enough to help him write a good song again?
I think this plot could have been written on the back of a napkin. At the end of the movie, I asked my friends "What was the plot?" They responded "Was that the movie?" There were so many inconsitencies and missing plot points I lost count. The director could have just filmed several hundred cliche moments and randomly assembled them, I don't know. Major actors tried to help: Maggie Gyllenhaal, Colin Farrell, Robert Duvall, but couldn't save this sorry plot. And WTF was Colin Farrell doing playing the country rock superstar? I mean, an Irishman without a twinge of Southern accent playing a country singer? Surely casting could have done better.
So what was worth seeing? Well, the music was great and Jeff Bridges was great. I hope Jeff Bridges gets the Oscar, he deserves one just because of his life's work, and his acting in this movie is quite extraordinary. He is widely known as "The Most Underappreciated Actor in Hollywood." So, go Jeff!
--Dorothy
Here's the movie. Drunk lowlife country singer "Bad" Blake is at the end of his ropes, without a hit in years, playing bowling alleys and other downscale venues, when he meets a girl. (Blake, as we find out, was married multiple times before meeting this girl). Then we have each possible predictible scene:
The early romance.
The love scene (actually, two of them, one heavier than the other).
The woman wanting the man to change (give up drinking).
The scene where the man endears himself to the woman's child.
The relationship getting more serious.
The first hints at conflict.
The big argument scene.
A dozen other cliche scenes, many repeating the themes above.
I annoyed my friends by enumerating these expected plot points before the main part of the movie got going, and checking them off as the movie got there.
The questions are, does the drunk redeem himself and get the girl, or does he continue his downward spiral? And if he redeems himself, is that by itself enough to get her. If he continues his downward spiral, is there anything that can save him? Is any of this pain enough to help him write a good song again?
I think this plot could have been written on the back of a napkin. At the end of the movie, I asked my friends "What was the plot?" They responded "Was that the movie?" There were so many inconsitencies and missing plot points I lost count. The director could have just filmed several hundred cliche moments and randomly assembled them, I don't know. Major actors tried to help: Maggie Gyllenhaal, Colin Farrell, Robert Duvall, but couldn't save this sorry plot. And WTF was Colin Farrell doing playing the country rock superstar? I mean, an Irishman without a twinge of Southern accent playing a country singer? Surely casting could have done better.
So what was worth seeing? Well, the music was great and Jeff Bridges was great. I hope Jeff Bridges gets the Oscar, he deserves one just because of his life's work, and his acting in this movie is quite extraordinary. He is widely known as "The Most Underappreciated Actor in Hollywood." So, go Jeff!
--Dorothy
"Who would have thought a good little girl like you could destroy my beautiful wickedness!"
February 21st, 2010 at 5:17:36 PM
permalink
Mrs and I saw this today. We liked it OK, because of the great performance by Bridges and the excellent soundtrack... but had one big beef: the relationship between Bridges and Gyllenhall was just not credible. Anyone who's known a person who drinks and smokes and eats like the Bad Blake character knows how repellent he is; the SMELL, the bleary eyes, the narcissism. But mostly the SMELL. This is a guy who throws up on himself several times during the movie, including into a trashcan onto his glasses (which he then cleans off and puts on). Neither of us accept that this could happen.
The first thing I ask for in a movie is that I'm allowed to suspend disbelief; that's what drives the film. I accept big blue aliens. I accept a strung out hitman and his big black bible quoting cohort. I accept fussy butler robots. I accept three wisecracking brothers (well, two wisecracking and one silent one) ruling a small foreign country. But I don't buy a hot single mother living in a $300,000 house (but who as a reporter can't afford decent tools like a decent digital SLR camera and flash drive recorder, and instead uses an old manual wind film camera and tape recorder) instantly sleeping with a smelly old drunk, no matter how great a country singer and songwriter he is.
If you're going to make a movie about people, then we need to understand WHY they do what they do. They have to have understandable motivations. Gyllenhall and Bridges seemed like they were in different movies. I don't blame her, I blame the casting director. That was a part for an older actress, someone like Sarandon but not as recognizable; Christine Lahti, maybe. Or maybe someone a little bit younger than the Blake character, but not 30 years younger. Someone with a few miles on her.
The first thing I ask for in a movie is that I'm allowed to suspend disbelief; that's what drives the film. I accept big blue aliens. I accept a strung out hitman and his big black bible quoting cohort. I accept fussy butler robots. I accept three wisecracking brothers (well, two wisecracking and one silent one) ruling a small foreign country. But I don't buy a hot single mother living in a $300,000 house (but who as a reporter can't afford decent tools like a decent digital SLR camera and flash drive recorder, and instead uses an old manual wind film camera and tape recorder) instantly sleeping with a smelly old drunk, no matter how great a country singer and songwriter he is.
If you're going to make a movie about people, then we need to understand WHY they do what they do. They have to have understandable motivations. Gyllenhall and Bridges seemed like they were in different movies. I don't blame her, I blame the casting director. That was a part for an older actress, someone like Sarandon but not as recognizable; Christine Lahti, maybe. Or maybe someone a little bit younger than the Blake character, but not 30 years younger. Someone with a few miles on her.
A falling knife has no handle.
February 24th, 2010 at 7:52:28 PM
permalink
It is the overwhelming favorite for best Actor award.
