Skip to main content

THE ARTIST!!!!!!!


The Artist is director Michael Hazanavicius ode to the silent films of yesteryear. Not only focus on a silent movie actor and movie making, but it in itself is also a silent movie.

The movie follows a silent movie actor named George Valentin through the rise and fall of his career. At the start of the film, we see George as this superstar celebrity; he loves the glitz and glamour of being a famous actor and soaks in all the attention he can get. He loves having his photos taken and being adorned on the front pages of newspapers. He is THAT kind of celebrity. At the premiere event of his latest movie, he bumps into one Peppy Miller – a young woman with big ambitions and dreams in Hollywoodland. The lives of the two intersect and an attraction immediately blossoms. The romance could only go so far as Valentin is a (happily?) married man.

George’s superstardom reaches its height at a precarious time. And as the 1920s are ushered out, so are silent movies. The new decade brings with it the advent of film audio and actors who can now utilize speech – or Talkies as they’re referred to. George, a traditionalist and a master at his craft, refuses to accept the new technology and soon finds that, like time, he too is fading away. Peppy becomes the new face of the Talkies and is a nationwide sensation. However, her rise to fame is at the cost of George’s descent into obscurity. And it’s their career directions that becomes a source of conflict, dampening their romantic endeavours.

Watching The Artist, I was reminded of why I loved Wall-E so much. There’s something powerful about a film that’s able to make you feel without the use of dialogue. Without the aid of speech, you have to channel your focus to facial expressions and the actions of the characters to understand the narrative. It’s a shame that this form of art is not greatly appreciated on the mainstream level. As George proclaims in the movie, they helped pave the way.

The story itself is nothing spectacular and nothing that you haven’t seen before. But there’s a certain charm with the way they tell the story and how you see the attraction grow in each of the two leads. On top of that, what made it work so much is that both of the main characters are completely relatable. You have George who is filled with this prideful soul, who won’t accept help when it’s offered or who refuses to humble himself and get off his high horse. And then there’s Peppy who is the kind of person who just wants to genuinely help out someone she cares about, even though the person might not appreciate it or understand. She has a good heart that brings out the best of intentions. But even she’s not flawless. The real winner in this movie is George’s best friend: a small dog named Uggie. Uggie completely steals every scene that he’s in. Not only does he provide comedic relief, but he plays an important role in the dramatic scenes.

In a movie with no dialogue, the musical score becomes even more important to heighten the emotion and to really flesh out the scenes. The score in The Artist really captures the mood of the characters and is so fitting to all the scenes. There are only a few moments of complete silence, done purposefully to bring in a sense of tension. It’s funny how silence can do that.

The only gripe I had was with some of the casting. I thought the movie would have benefitted more with a completely unknown cast. And although the two main leads are not known in mainstream America, there are a few recognizable faces that fill out the supporting cast (i.e. James Cromwell, John Goodman, Malcolm MacDowell, etc.). But it’s the recognizability (is that a word?) of these faces that ground the film back to present day. I think having an unknown supporting cast would have really given the feeling that you’re seeing something from a different decade. But all things considered, this is just a small gripe.

In a year filled with unspectacular movies, it’s not hard to call this movie one of the year’s best. It’s well crafted, and you can tell that Hazanavicius loves this art form. He really has fun with it, and in turn, the audience can have fun with it.

It’s in limited release right now, and if I can recommend, see it with a wife/husband or girlfriend/boyfriend. It’s one of those types of movies. Until then, later geeks!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dreamers, Achievers, Believers

It was quite a week last week. It started off on a more heavy note last Sunday, but as the week wore on, things became better and more clear. So let's do a little recap. This is going to be kind of long, so if you find this kind of stuff boring I've inserted pictures of funny cats for your entertainment. So... 1.5 Weeks Ago About 1.5 weeks ago, my friend Jon from Living Room gave me the contact info for his uncle. His uncle is an engineer and apparently was looking for new grads and new hands to hire. That week, I gave him a few calls but he wasn't there when I called him and when he returned my calls, I wasn't here either. We were playing phone tag that week *insert schoolgirl giggle*. Sunday Morning So last Sunday morning, his uncle gave me a call at 9 am (The morning! My weakness! HISS!) and we talked about stuff. I was telling him a bit about school as well as elaborating my work/coop experience as he didn't have my resume yet. So he goes on to tell

The Science of God

Not too long ago, two of my friends had posted their thoughts on evolution and creationism. Both friends shared similar sentiments on the topic (you can view Skylar's here and Keith's here ). Coincidence or not, shortly before they made their postings, I purchased a book called The Science of God by Dr. Gerald Schroeder, which was based on the same topic. Unfortunately, at the time of my friend's postings, I had not finished the book, but now I have. In The Science of God , Schroeder attempts to debunk the dichotomy that exists between science/evolution and creationism. He tries to show that there can exist a duality between the two and that discoveries in science actually prove the story of creation in the bible. The book can be roughly divided into three categories that being the concepts of time, the second with the biology of evolution, and lastly the concept of free will. In describing time, he focuses on the 6 days that are explained in the beginning of Genes

MAX PAYNE was oh so PAYNEFUL!!!

What a failure this was. An EPIC FAILURE~! And I'll tell you why. This movie had everything going for it which was why it made the failure seem so huge. It had star power. It had a very competent director. The visual style was there. It had a simple storyline... a storyline that was basically fuck-proof because it's so basic. The effects (when there were any) were also pretty great. So where did they go wrong? Pacing. If the first two-thirds of the film was like the last third, I think it would have been a fine film. Not great by any means, but fine. I mean, there was hardly any action in the first hour. It was all talk and build up. Every 5 minutes I was saying to myself, "okay, something cool is gonna happen now". But it never came. I think had they added 2 or 3 big action sequences during that hour, that it would have helped the film breathe and flow better. I mean, didn't they realize that the source material was an action game? Max Payne is