tim’s thought property

In order of my viewing:
Walk the Line (2005) - starring Joaquin Phoenix and Reese Witherspooon
November 18, 2005
From his troubled beginnings in the Deep South, to his first marriage and musical success, Cash’s life was no doubt the turmoil that drives a musician to create. The film was done in such a way that it took the rise of Johnny Cash to the screen, and not his entire rise, fall and re-birth. Granted, an entire life’s retrospective would have been very enthralling, such a film would no doubt have to be augmented to pass advisory committees.
When I heard that Joaquin Phoenix was playing the part of the Man in Black, I was at first delighted. He is a fine actor and I thought he would do well. Then, I was a little concerned with the look. He didn’t really seem to have the Cash look to me. But when he took to the stage and sung out Jackson, Get Rhythm and Ring of Fire; the line from actor to character was blurred. I thought I was watching Johnny Cash.
The film was a great telling of the early life of Cash - his first marriage, amphetamine addiction and rise to musicianship. The fact that Witherspoon, Phoenix and all the other singers had sung their own parts just increased the respect I had with the film. It was a feat to sing in such a way that did Cash justice, but also not to sound like an imitation.
It was based around the material in two of Cash’s biographies, I still am not so sure about some of the consistency. Some of his early songs recorded or sung in the film were written and finished much later in his career. But, there must be an appeasement to the masses, I suppose. What is storytelling without embellishing?

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005) - starring Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Ralph Fiennes
November 20, 2005
I’m a Potter fan, and we’ll leave it at that.
The film had the tall task of carving up a 700+ page book, and what it came out with was (from what I recall) the best material. The mood and tone of the film is appropriately dark, and the acting on behalf of the three young leads is getting ever better. The story is based around a wizarding tournament set in Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, and two other schools come to compete. It can mean certain death for those who enter, and someone has put Harry Potter’s name into the Goblet of Fire to be drawn for the challenge. Suffice it to say, Harry has to undertake some daunting challenges; the disdain of classmates and his friends; and ultimately the return of Lord Voldemort, the wizard who tried to kill Harry.
Ralph Fiennes played the part of Voldemort and he played it to the “T”. Although his screen time isn’t very long, his presence is powerful and drawing. The high calibre actors, such as Branden Gleeson, Alan Rickman, Michael Gambon, Robbie Coltrane and Maggie Smith only further add to the excellent characterization of their parts.
When looking at this kind of film, people often write it off as kids stuff or just rubbish. I can assure you I did the same. But once I watched it, I found the story and acting to be very captivating and very well done. One can look down on any actor in this film and write them off for doing something frivolous, but what is acting after all? It is making someone believe you are someone else. And by that definition, this film has some of the finest examples of that.

Good Night and Good Luck (2005) - starring David Strathairn, George Clooney, Robert Downey Jr.
November 25 2005
Set amidst the rise of television in the fifties, this film is centered around the media’s reaction to the current affair. Senator Joe MacCarthy is set upon exposing and trying all those Communist and Communist sympathizers. In this day and age, television is the new medium in which to broadcast. Edward R. Murrow, played by Strathairn, is the newscaster who dares to attack such a sensitive issue on his program.
The film is done in black and white, and beautifully so. In some ways to reflect the era, in other ways, I think, as a commentary on the situation of the times. Where there were only two camps in which to stand - Traitor or Patriot. There were a lot of wonderful shots and juxtapositions in the film, all to do with perception and social commentary. The most chilling parts of the film were the opening and closing speeches done by Murrow. In there he explained that the power of television can be used to denounce and decry injustice, but “if we’re not careful, it will be used only to entertain and pacify. It will then only be colours and lights.” And he was right.
To the state of things now, we have such a high demand for entertainment, and even the news is sensationalized. It seems that the hopeful future of the tool of television was never achieved, and even what we have to classify as such, still is so glossed with entertainment.
The film was a great piece about a moment in history and even more so to commentary of cultural paranoia. So easy it is to not stand up when injustice is committed, and to take the risk to do so. This film, one you may likely not see much longer in the theatres, is definitely one to go watch.