If you like what you see tonight, or even if you have modeling aspirations that have nothing to do with Miss Banks, you will soon have an opportunity to get your stiletto-clad foot in the door. This Saturday, ANTM is calling all wannabe models in St. Louis. They're casting hopefuls for Cycle 13, but there's a catch this time around; you have to be "short." In all actuality, 5'7" isn't considered that short in the real world, so since that's the tallest you can be to make the cut for the casting call here this weekend, the next season of ANTM promises to be a bit more average.
Date: Saturday, March 7
Time: 8 a.m.
Where: St. Louis College of Health Careers
Missourians have made it onto the show before (Booneville's Sarah Rhoades was on Cycle 5), so good luck to any ladies headed to the casting call.
]]>That being said, I'm still looking forward to the start of the eighth season of the show this Tuesday (January 13). It's not because I can't wait to see which 12-year-old's closet Paula has raided this time; it's because I love to watch the singers who suck. It all starts out with a well-intentioned mom telling their child that they have a great voice, and the next thing you know, they're embarrassing themselves on national TV because they think they they's the next Stevie Wonder. But it's not just one tone-deaf idol wannabe - the supply is seemingly endless, which is why I'm so excited to see who thought they could sing this time around.
To get you in the mood for the start of this season, click on [tab:video] for a few of my favorite horrible idol auditions ever.
]]>
Director Jason Reitman considers buying an electric razor with his massive tax credit
As much as St. Louisans would like to believe our town's charm and visual appeal caused Hollywood to come knocking, the almighty dollar played a larger role than any. Knowing the massive economic impact such a project brings with it, state officials dangled the tax credit carrot in front of producers just in time to sway them in our direction. Missouri currently boasts the highest tax credit available in the United States, offering up to $1.5 million to studios willing to set up shop. Though some estimate Up In The Air could bring St. Louis as much as $50 million, Hansen has a more conservative estimate of $30 million and says tax incentives could be a double-edged sword. "The film business is fickle, they'll go wherever they get a good tax credit." says Hansen, "It's a fine line to walk though, because we don't want to just give our town away." Be that as it may, there's likely no stopping the hype train as Mr. Clooney and the rest of the crew inches closer and closer to the film's mid-February start date. In the meantime, those wanting to be extras should keep an eye on the Missouri Film Commission's project hotline. Until then, the wait continues.
]]>Well boys, the jokes on you. Why? Because according to AP, George Clooney is coming to town. And not just for a quick drop-in like Will Smith did last month. He’ll be in town for months to film the movie Up In The Air. Lock up your wives (and daughters) St. Louis.
He’ll be playing a coldhearted corporate downsizer on a quest to reach 1,000,000 frequent flier miles. The film is directed by Jason Riteman, the man who brought us Juno. Apparently a large chunk of the movie will be filmed in the recently closed Class D section of Lambert Airport. That’s the third movie that’s been filmed at Lambert since they lost TWA. Apparently there’s an upside to recession. Who knew? Of course, if Hollywood is looking for airports with light traffic, wait until the get a load of Mid America Airport.
The St. Louis Film Board estimates that the movie could have an economic impact of $50 million on the region. (I’m assuming/hoping they mean $50 million to the good but you never know. St. Louis can get pretty dumb when somebody famous shows up.) I wonder how much of the $50 million will go to Cordell & Cordell after Clooney tears his way through this town’s women? Of course, Clooney’s so cool most men would probably be honored if he slept with their wives. It’s like getting the “Cool Guy Seal Of Approval” on your taste in ladies.
The film is listed on IMDB.com but it’s so new nobody’s even posted how much it will suck yet (which I thought was sort of an IMDB tradition.) So our fare city will be treated to 5-months (or more) of George Clooney sightings. One positive (but unintended) consequence of his visit is that it could result in a series decline in the number of McGraw Millhaven mentions in Deb Peterson’s column. Imagine what would happen if McGraw Millhaven actually meets George Clooney? Deb Peterson’s head might explode.
]]>
World's most adorable vacuum cleaner
Owen Wilson and Jennifer Aniston headline the flick with support coming from Eric Dane, Alan Arkin, and of course, a Humane Society's worth of pooches. The story (if you're one of the few who hasn't cracked the book,) is a predictable but smile-inducing tale of a clumsy (Grogan dubbed him "The World's Worst Dog") lab retriever who brings a young couple together by tearing everything in the house apart. If it sounds cheesy, it is...but let's not pretend we're expecting an Oscar winner here, you know the plot coming into the theater. Now that we've accepted the cheese factor, we're left with performance and dialogue.

Doesn't this just make you want a dog?
Wilson and Aniston turn in respectable performances as John and Jennifer Grogan, a young couple trying to juggle journalism careers and a growing brood. Jen's in her niche with the fluffy role, so it's believable to the audience to see her getting yanked along the beach by a giant mutt, spilling a bag of dog food, and so on. With his latest paychecks coming from Wedding Crashers and You, Me, and Dupree, Wilson also seems at home with a light comedy. Though director David Frankel (The Devil Wears Prada) takes a few liberties with the novel's adaptation, he stays true to the story's critical events, but uses more than his fair share of horribly cheesy lines that my stomach wishes were left out of the story. As for the human portion of the Grogan clan, let's just say these kids should stay in school. Though I realize a young actor's role rarely defines a career, the handful that played Patrick, Conor, and Colleen make their scenes feel like an elementary school play. That, combined with the fact that the lines the kids delivered were considerably over their heads, made a distinguishing smudge on an otherwise likeable movie.
If you're a dog person, your appreciation for Marley and Me will grow tenfold. The giant pooch's antics are not only smirk-worthy, they're downright accurate as anyone with an oversized mutt will tell you. If you don't swing on the K9 side of the vine, either take the kids or wait for it to come out on DVD. Click [tab:video] for the trailer. This one gets a C+.
]]>
However, I am extremely confident when I say that I will NOT be even remotely tempted to spend my limited free time watching annoyingly sissy "men" display their annoying sissyness, which seems to be the latest reality TV trend.
That's right, beginning tomorrow night at 9 p.m., you can tune in to "Momma's Boys" on NBC. (If you thought you heard me trying not to hurl just now, you heard right.) Just in case you can't tell what the show is about from its title, "Momma's Boys" will capture the "intense, emotional showdowns" among three young men who hold their mothers up as the most important lady in their lives. All the while, they will be searching for whoever their moms tell them to pick love.
And if you can't get your fill of watching idiot guys on "Mamma's Boys," you're in luck. Brody Jenner, former homeboy of the biggest loser on earth (Spender Pratt), has an opening in his dude posse. On December 29, "Bromance" debuts on MTV, and in the words of Mr. Jenner himself, becoming the go-to guy that he most wants to bond with won't be easy. Nine guys are going to try really hard though. For a preview of this cool cat's search for a new homeboy, click on [tab:video].
]]>
The St. Louis Film Critics' Association announced the 2008 awards winners. You can see a list of the nominees in my posting from last week.
Here's a complete list of who won what. Feel free to discuss below.
BEST PICTURE
The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button
BEST ACTOR
Sean Penn (Milk)
BEST ACTRESS
Kate Winslet (Revolutionary Road)
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Heath Ledger (The Dark Knight)
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Viola Davis (Doubt)
BEST DIRECTOR
Danny Boyle (Slumdog Millionaire)
BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
Slumdog Millionaire - U.K./U.S.A/India
BEST DOCUMENTARY
Man On Wire
BEST COMEDY
Burn After Reading
BEST ANIMATED FILM
Wall-E
MOST ORIGINAL, INNOVATIVE OR CREATIVE FILM
The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
Mandy Walker (Australia)
BEST SCREENPLAY (ORIGINAL OR ADAPTED)
Peter Morgan (Frost/Nixon)
BEST MUSIC (SOUNDTRACK OR SCORE, ORIGINAL OR ADAPTED)
The Visitor
BEST SPECIAL EFFECTS
The Dark Knight
]]>
As the movie opens, Jamal is on the Hindi version of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire. He is one question away from winning the grand prize when the show runs of time and he is asked to come back the following evening. (That’s not a spoiler by the way. It’s literally the first thing they tell you.) Suspected of cheating, he is abducted/arrested by the police and roughed up. He’s then forced to go through his entire Millionaire run question-by-question explaining just exactly how he knew the answer to each question. As he progresses through each round, we learn more about his life growing up on the streets of Mumbai. Seemingly innocuous events provide answers later in life: a childhood song learned in school, a piece of foreign currency given to a friend, the name of an American inventor and on and on. Jamal is the Kaiser Soze of quiz shows.
Sometimes the answers are buried in the most painful of memories. Living on the street at when they were both younger than ten, Jamal and Salim are taken in by Maman. Maman is a sort of Indian Fagin, taking in abandoned children and teaching them the ins and outs of begging. However, Maman is a much darker figure than Dickens’ Fagin (no mean feat). Jamal’s motivation for competing on Who Wants To Be A Millionaire is that his childhood love Latika (Freida Pinto), whom he’s lost track of, watches the show religiously. His interest is not to win the money (well, ok, maybe a little bit). But his primary concern is to find his love.
A large portion of the story’s flashback is told with child actors all which perfectly embody their respective characters. The movie bounces back and forth quite a bit but Boyle’s direction is never rudderless. You always know who you’re seeing and what’s going on. Slumdog Millionaire is mash-up of the highest degree: part love story, party urban street drama, part Dickensian fairy tale, part travelogue of India’s seedy underbelly. The film is a joyous rollercoaster ride of emotion. It’s a crowd-pleaser of the highest order; an ebullient, exuberant ode to life and perseverance. Boyle’s gritty depiction of urban squalor is told with dramatic camera angles and fast-paced editing that somehow perfectly fuses with this enchanted fable without undermining the sentimental (but not overly so) romance that is ultimately the movie’s heart. Boyle somehow manages to create a story like no other yet simultaneously as old as time.
On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being Great Expectations and 1 being Get Rich Or Die Tryin’, Slumdog Millionaire gets a 9.
]]>The St. Louis Film Critics Association (of which I am a member) announced their fourth annual award nominees today. In order for a film to be eligible, it has to have been shown in a St. Louis theater or film festival or a screener DVD must have been made available to critics. So you might see some titles on there that haven’t been released yet. Don’t worry, it’s not rigged. We’ve seen them (or at least been given ample opportunity).
Here’s what’s been nominated:
BEST PICTURE
BEST ACTOR
BEST ACTRESS
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
BEST DIRECTOR
BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
BEST DOCUMENTARY
BEST COMEDY
BEST ANIMATED FILM
MOST ORIGINAL, INNOVATIVE OR CREATIVE FILM
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
BEST SCREENPLAY (ORIGINAL OR ADAPTED)
BEST MUSIC (SOUNDTRACK OR SCORE, ORIGINAL OR ADAPTED)
BEST SPECIAL EFFECTS
Critics are only allowed to vote if they’ve seen every film in a specific category. Noticeably absent is the upcoming Tom Cruise film Valkyrie. It was not screened in time for nominations. It was not screened for critics and MGM requested that it not be considered for any awards. I’ll let you draw your own conclusions.
The winners will be announced Sunday, December 14. For more info you can go to www.stlfilmcritics.org.
]]>What a dreary, dreadfully insipid movie. Punisher: War Zone is without a doubt the worst movie I’ve reviewed so far. I see movies for free and I still wanted my money back. Nothing in this film works. The acting, the staging, the set design, the story…nothing. It’s an ugly, vile, mean-spirited film.
The story is virtually non-existent. Frank Castle (aka The Punisher) is waging a one man war against crime after his family was caught in the crossfire of a mob shootout. This time out The Punisher is played by Ray Stevenson. This is the 3rd attempt to make this franchise work. (And, just for the record, this is not a sequel to 2004’s The Punisher.) The film opens with Castle killing virtually all of the heads of New York’s various crime “families.” In the process he leaves one alive but severely wounded. His name is Billy Russoti (played by Dominic West). His face is mangled and reconstructed (poorly) by a back-alley plastic surgeon. So he takes the name Jigsaw. Why? Because that’s what people do in these things. In the realm of comic books, taking a name of this sort makes sense. It’s part of the genre. But cinematically, The Punisher doesn’t share a world with Spiderman and Captain America. So it seems rather silly for a random mob boss to suddenly adopt a villainous nom de plume.
After being released from back alley post-op, Jigsaw frees his even crazier brother, a cannibal that goes by the name of Looney Bin Jim (played by Doug Hutchison). From there, Jigsaw’s mob goes on a killing spree to recover money and draw out The Punisher.
Castle has been reduced to a virtually silent, vigilante golem. He doesn’t speak until almost a half-hour into the film. It’s one of the movie’s highlights. There is hardly a single performance that works. Dominic West as Jigsaw would be more at home in a Damon Runyon story. If not for the hyper-violence, his performance would be perfectly at home in Batman…the TV show. Doug Hutchison’s fey interpretation of Looney Bin Jim feels like he stepped out of some sort of community theater production of Silence Of The Lambs. And Dash Mihok’s rendition of Detective Soap, a weak-kneed officer assigned the task of arresting The Punisher, seems to have been designed for some sort of Saturday morning cartoon version called Punisher Adventures that would air between Dragonball Z and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. It’s as if every major character each thought they were making a completely different movie. As for Ray Stevenson as The Punisher, it’s hard to say. Not much is required of him beyond being stoic and shooting people…not necessarily in that order.
And for a movie with so little plot, there are so many plot holes. Jigsaw is a mob boss but he has literally two guys in his mob. He has to go scrounging up random street thugs in order for there to be enough cannon fodder for the movie’s final showdown. And after Castle accidentally kills an undercover FBI agent he is so distraught that he gives up being The Punisher…for 15 seconds And why does every building in the movie, regardless of how rundown, dilapidated and clearly abandoned it is, have a brand new, brightly lit sign declaring its name?
This is essentially a slasher flick where we’re supposed to root for the slasher. (After all, is there really a difference between Michael Myers and Frank Castle other than their victims?) The effects are more in-line with a slasher flick than they are with a traditional action movie. It’s a unique take and, honestly, it might be the movie’s only positive attribute. And that’s a pretty sad thing.
On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being Death Wish and 1 being Death Wish 5: The Face Of Death, Punisher: War Zone gets a 2.
]]>Chess’ first discovery is Muddy Waters (played by Jeffrey Wright). Waters leaves sharecropping in Mississippi in order to follow his passion for music. He quickly meets up with soon-to-be legendary harmonica player Little Walter (Columbus Short). And then the hits just keep on comin.’
Cadillac Records is a fun but seriously flawed film. It falls into the same trap that so many music based biopics do and ends up becoming a collection of scenes rather than a cohesive story. There are parts of the movie that feel as if they’ve already been parodied by last year’s Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story. One of Walk Hard’s best gags was how Dewey would meet famous people and they’d always introduce themselves using their full names and some sort of identifier: “Hi, I’m Ringo Starr of The Beatles.” There’s a scene where The Rolling Stones stop by the Chess Studios that is present for no other reason than to say (nay, scream), “ Hey look, The Rolling Stones liked these guys.”
The film is basically sequential anecdotes and, I would guess, many of them apocryphal. At one point, Little Walter shoots an impersonator in the middle of the street in broad daylight and simply drives away. The incident is never mentioned again. The movie also hints at an affair between Etta James (Beyoncé Knowles) and Leonard Chess that apparently has no basis in fact. Taken on its own, Cadillac Records would make one think that there were only four artists on Chess Records: Muddy Waters, Little Walter, Etta James and Howlin’ Wolf (Eamonn Walker). I understand the need for truncation. The movie already short shrifts everyone’s story in order to hit its hour and forty-five minute running time. But to not even mention artists like Buddy Guy, John Lee Hooker or Bo Diddley feels somewhat hypocritical. It seems disingenuous for a film whose central conceit is that the work of Waters, Walter, Wolf and James has been glossed over by pop culture.
Good performances abound in the film. Jeffery Wright gives a star turn as Muddy Waters. And if Mos Def’s acting career ever tanks, he could make a nice living touring as a Chuck Berry impersonator. His performance is so strong that it makes you wish they had spun him off into a Chuck Berry picture. His protrayal of Berry is full of humor and charm that we rarely see from the actual Berry these days. And from what little we do see of Berry’s story, it becomes fairly evident as to why those traits have faded over time. Eamonn Walker is also fascinating as Howlin’ Wolf. And, of course, there’s Beyonce as Etta James. While some critics are raving, her performance isn't drastically different from her role in Dreamgirls. And, like Dreamgirls, it seems like much her acting is centered on her singing.
Cadillac Records is an enjoyable but somewhat crudely assembled picture. There are some fun moments and it goes without saying that the soundtrack is wonderful. But, ultimately it feels as if an opportunity was wasted. The actors were game but the screenplay lets them down with what feels less like an A-list movie and more like a reenactment of an episode of Behind The Music.
On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being Ray and 1 being Josie And The Pussycats, Cadillac Records gets a 6.
]]>Here are a few Twilight-themed gift ideas, and just so you know that I wasn't pulling this out of thin air, I ran them by a few friends who would appreciate them. The following gifts have a Twilight fan's seal of approval.


Don’t let the title (or the commercials promising a chick flick of the highest order) fool you. Australia is a good ol’ fashion western. Sure, the movie is ostensibly set just before the outbreak of World War II but this movie could have just as easily starred John Wayne and Maureen O’Hara as it does Hugh Jackman and Nicole Kidman. Kidman plays Lady Sarah Ashley, an English aristocrat who inherits Far Away Downs, an expansive cattle ranch in the Australian outback. There is the obligatory culture clash as she attempts to bring her civilized ways to both the hyper-masculine world of cattle ranching and the ancient Aboriginal tribes that inhabit the land. Jackman plays Dover, a charming rapscallion with a heart-of-gold. He plays the role of a jaded loner but I don’t think a spoiler alert is needed to reveal that he can be counted on to do the right thing in a pinch.
Lady Ashley quickly (and justifiably) runs off Fletcher (David Wenham), her head ranch hand, when she finds him morally lacking. The rest of the hands leave with him. She then convinces Dover to help her run the ranch and drive her herd to market. Since she’s short on staff, she’s forced to join the drive herself as well as use the help of Nullah (played by newcomer Brandon Walters), a half-white/half-Aborigine child that lives on the ranch. (Apparently child labor was cute in the ‘30s.) In order to secure a lucrative military contract, Lady Ashley needs to get her stock to market before King Carney (Bryan Brown), a competitor who has a virtual monopoly on the Australian cattle market. Over the course of their drive, they form a sort of makeshift family as they all teach the others about their respective ways of life.
Australia is full of…well, Australia. Shot on location the movie is replete with large, sweeping, beautiful shots of the outback. The movie allegedly cost $130 million and every penny of it is on the screen. Australia is as much a character in this film as Jackman or Kidman are. The country is so lovingly shot that it’s no wonder Tourism Australia, the official Australian board of tourism, is launching a $26 million ad campaign based around the film. Australia, while not quite the caliber of a Howard Hawks or John Ford film, is certainly the type of movie they would have made. It’s a broad, sweeping epic; a story of a nation and the people who tamed it; a travelogue of a time gone past. It traffics in much of the same subject matter: a woman’s place in a “man’s world”, frontier racism, the modernization of rustic land. Make no mistake, it’s not as good as Hawks or Ford at their best, but it comes close at times. The extended cattle drive sequence is spectacular, albeit a bit too CGi-y in spots. The movie’s broad strokes, stunning landscapes and good old fashioned storytelling draw you in.
Unfortunately, the movie falters in its last hour. (The movie is close to three hours.) The story of the cattle drive consumes roughly the first two hours and it’s clearly the strongest portion of the film. The movie transitions oddly into its last third. As the cattle drive portion comes to close, the movie has the feel of finality. Storylines are wrapped up, character arcs are resolved. It feels like the credits will start rolling at any second. But the movie continues on for almost another hour. It evolves into a war movie as Australia is attacked by Japan. Families are torn apart; our heroes are separated and forced to search for each other. But it all feels so tacked-on. The rousing race to market is followed by the slow realization that what felt like a thrilling conclusion was merely a false coda.
Australia ends up a frustrating prospect in that it’s 2/3 of a great movie. It feels as if the filmmakers were bound and determined to create an epic and knew that an hour and forty-five minute running time does not an epic make. In this age of gratuitous sequel-itis, it’s difficult to criticize filmmaker for being overly ambitious but the movie would’ve been better served by a reduction in scale.
On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being Red River and 1 being Heaven’s Gate, Australia gets a 7.
]]>Four Christmases is a harmless little trifle that can be described as cute if one is feeling gracious. It, however, cannot be described as funny. Vince Vaughn has given up on being a “serious actor” and has decided to make a career playing Vince Vaughn. And I’m fine with that. But his rambling, nervous patter that was so effective in Wedding Chasers falls flat here. His comedic riffing can be hysterical in how he deflates a recipient’s ego with rapid-fire backhanded compliments disguised in a sea of verbiage. But here it’s all riffing and no jokes, as if the writers had created the core of his speeches and expected him to bring the funny later. Well, he did not.
The movie feels like repeated improv scenarios that consistently fall flat. “Ok, give me a wacky hobby…cage fighter, got it…now give me weird situation…installing a satellite dish…great suggestions…here we go.” “Ok now I need a personality trait and public place…cougar and church…awesome!” Unfortunately, this troop is incapable of mining any of this for laughs; as is evidenced by the movie’s 82 minute running time. It’s not even as if there are jokes that don’t work. There just aren’t any jokes. It’s as if they thought the zany situations were hysterical enough to carry the film. The cast includes Robert Duvall, Jon Favreau, Mary Steenburgen, Dwight Yoakam, Tim McGraw, Jon Voight and Sissy Spacek. All of their talents are completely, utterly wasted in this film. The movie isn’t so much bad as it is forgettable. I promise you; in five years you’ll stumble upon this film airing on TBS or USA and you’ll be surprised by its very existence.
On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation and 1 being Christmas With The Kranks, Four Christmases gets a 5.
]]>Directed by Gus Van Sant, Milk is a masterfully crafted, but slow paced, bio-pic. Van Sant makes wonderful usage of actual period footage and a framing device of Milk leaving a recorded will and testament (which is true) to set the scene. The movie moves back and forth seamlessly between archival footage and that of the actors. I’m sure much of this storytelling device was necessitated by the gentrification of San Francisco in general and The Castro (a predominantly gay neighborhood) specifically. Regardless of the reason, the end result of the footage is to give the film a You Are There feel typically reserved for documentaries. Unfortunately, the movie’s first half gets bogged down in Milk’s multiple failed attempts for public office. Parts of the movie are fascinating: the gay community banding together to protect themselves from the police, watching the “established” gay leaders distancing themselves from Milk and his “uppity” crew, watching Milk figure out how to work the system. But much of the first half is as interesting as watching any non-gay man run for a seat as a councilman, which is to say, not very interesting at all.
The film picks-up considerably once Milk is elected to office. Watching his rise to power is fascinating. Equally fascinating is watching him become so adroit at the political machinations at which he was once so ham-handedly opposed. The second half of the film is consumed largely by Milk’s fight against the Proposition 6 aka The Briggs Initiative, a ballot measure designed to prevent homosexuals from teaching in public schools. Milk, frustrated with his compatriots’ apprehension at attacking the measure head-on, mounts his own campaign against the proposal. Milk’s organizational skills were legendary and are featured prominently in the film. He had the ability to muster a crowd of thousands on a moment’s notice. Of course, what the film fails to mention is that he often did this with the help of another charismatic San Francisco community activist by the name of Jim Jones.
Penn’s performance at times borders on over acting but Milk was truly a larger-than-life figure. For those unfamiliar with the actual Milk, Penn might appear over-the-top at times. But the afore mentioned framing device of Milk recording his last will and testament serves the dual purpose of affording Penn the opportunity to show a more subdued side and allows Milk to serve as the story’s narrator from beyond the grave.
Milk’s eventual assassin, Dan White, is played by Josh Brolin. The movie portrays White as a more of a tragic figure than an outright villain. And while it’s remarkably gracious of the filmmakers to show the man’s complexities, his depiction as right-wing, Christian, possibly closeted homosexual isn’t entirely accurate. White, a former cop turned firefighter turned elected official, was far from a right wing zealot. In real life he supported numerous gay-friendly measures. He voted to save the Pride Center (a sort of gay VFW Hall) and for a resolution honoring the 25th anniversary of a local lesbian couple. He even initially voted for the Gay Rights Ordinance, Milk’s centerpiece legislation that would protect San Franciscans from losing their jobs based on their sexuality. He only voted against the bill after Milk had (in White’s opinion) abandoned him on pet project of his own. He even donated money to Milk’s campaign against the Briggs Initiative. The problem with the inaccurate depiction isn’t so much that we might misunderstand a double-murder, but that by misrepresenting his apparent motivation the filmmakers are fostering a sort of implied guilt by association with unaffiliated parties. While the religious right and the gay community are certainly not friends, there doesn’t appear to be an actual link between Dan White and that movement. Connecting the two erroneously does a disservice to both groups.
However, Brolin’s performance is surprisingly moving given that he’s the heavy. While I think the movie somewhat misrepresented White’s motivation, they didn’t do it at the expense of a well-drawn character. White isn’t portrayed as the mustache-twirling, cartoony villain he could have so easily been turned into. He’s painted not as vitriolic homophobe but as man that felt betrayed by Milk. He’s less of demagogue and more of a wounded child. His horrendous acts aren’t as much a political statement as they are a temper tantrum. Brolin plays him as the kid excluded from the “cool clique.” You can see he respects Milk and longs to be a part of their club. Whether that longing is sexual or platonic is never really revealed (though the movie hints at that former). While there is no evidence in real life as to White questioning his sexuality, his initial respect of and search for friendship with Milk is agreed upon by all parties. Brolin drives home the tragic nature of the character.
Milk really captures the feel of its time. Van Sant’s mixed use of actual period footage in combination with that of his own creates an immersive affect. This combined with stellar performances from Sean Penn & Josh Brolin, make an intriguing but flawed snapshot of a captivating period in our not-too-distant past.
On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being Philadelphia and 1 being I Now Pronounce You Chuck And Larry, Milk, gets a 7.
]]>