Friday, January 21, 2011

El Bola (Pellet)


Shortly into El Bola, the twelve-year-old protagonist overhears a woman at his family's shop tell his father that 'if we were Pablo's age, we wouldn't have any problems.' If only that were true. Not only is that false on general terms (cartoonist Bill Watterson on said that "People who get nostalgic about childhood were obviously never children,") but Pablo is living with an unbearable load for anyone, in a household where breathing could get one beaten.

El Bolais a full-blooded film about child abuse, yet lacking cheap shock value (Joan Crawford smudged with face cream, screaming "NO WIRE HANGERS!" while her little daughter cowers, comes to mind.) Instead of a larger than life (not to say over the top) performance as the crazy parent that wins a Razzle, this movie concentrates on the children affected, nay, not only that, but directs them well, which is hard to do.

Sad-eyed Juan José Ballesta, as Pablo, is the emotional center of the film. Pablo calls himself 'pellet,' named after a little ball he keeps for luck, which doesn't seem to do him much good. He harbors an almost doglike desire for a close friend, not the group of kids he plays a dangerous game on the train tracks with, further jeopardizing his safety, This security is found with Alfredo, the rough-around-the-edges son of a tattooist, who doesn't take to him at first when he finds his pleas for friendship desperate-bordering-on-the-creepy. They bond a little quickly at an amusement park, but it takes us to the main conflict in the film, which is when Pablo's sadistic pop Mariano finds his aloneness threatened, and tries to drive other people out of his life

Alfredo's family's a wonder, to a kid who has never known a homelife without violence and painful punishment. A Liberal, playful bunch, they talk about just about anything and joke and laugh at the dinner table, a far cry from Pablo's family, with his mother yelling at his incontinent grandmother and his father constantly comparing Pablo to their other son who died in a car crash. But Alfredo's life is far from perfect. His father has a temper as well. His gay godfather is dying from AIDS, and he isn't allowed to see him due to the state he's in.

The amazing thing about this film, which won the Spanish Academy Awards, and the child actors who have chosen to work in it, is the naturalness. The kids are not dumbed down, nor made into pretentious little douches who must read the dictionary every night before bed. They're living, breathing, thinkinghumans (I'll leave the thinking part in underline, for future filmmakers to pay close attention to. They talk about death, about sickness, about food and phallic tattoos (Can you get one? I don't know, and I suspect they don't either.) The dialogue seemed rarely scripted, and very natural.

So what? I won't give a four-star rating, because, well, the character development isn't quite strong enough, but it's certainly a impressive debut with kids, who, now that they're grown, are on the way to becoming great actors. It's very much worth watching. The question is, are you up for it? (Rated NR. Although it is rather perversely catagorized as a 'father-son children & family movie' on Netflix, it is definitely not for kids.)








Trailer Not Available

Saturday, January 1, 2011

Me and Orson Welles


You needn't know much about Orson Welles to see (or like) this movie. Nor do you need to devour Shakespeare. As an unsophisticated and non-well-read viewer, I found Me & Orson Wellesto be an enjoyable and unpretentious period piece, by Richard Linklater, the director of the also enjoyable, unpretentious, but more comically oriented The School Of Rock. But now, instead of the manic Jack Black, Linklater has cast Zac Efron in the lead, a controversial decision considering many non-twelve-year-old girls consider him a pretty boy unfit for anything past High School Musical. But don't worry, the guy doesn't seem limited to teenybopper franchises, and he does fine here, in a film he rather self-importantly deemed the first of his roles he was actually interested in.

He is backed up by virtual unknown Christian McKay, Eddie Marsan, and talented but typecast Leo Bill, who is forever willing to play the nerd, misfit, psychotic, or pervert. Efron plays Richard Samuels, an ambitious and slightly naive 'almost eighteen-year-old' living in new York City in 1937, who regularly skips school, much to the chagrin of his disgruntled mother, and gets a part in the Mercury Theater's production of "Julius Caesar" after publicly singing an awful song about cereal. Womanizer Joe Cotten (James Tupper) and womanizer-in-training Norman Lloyd (Leo Bill,) both of which have their minds on only one thing (and it's not theater) show him the ropes as well as Assistant Sonja (Claire Danes,) who Richard promptly develops a crush on.

The show revolves around keeping Orson happy, a self-obsessed terror set on his own talent. Richard won't be being paid. You must not argue. The actors laugh as a knee-jerk reaction at Orson's unfunny jokes. What does he earn for all this? "The chance to be sprayed by Orson's spit." Why does Richard keep the job at all? He has hope he can make it in the acting business. It's better than going to school. Sonja might be a big part of it. Norman and Joe classily comment that 'every man in the show wants to get into her pants,' then make a bet- the first one get five dollars. It is easy to guess that Sonja will be furious and broken-hearted that Richard made the bet, but it doesn't happen, which highlights the unexpected turns the movie takes.

The rest of the movie concentrates on the quirks of the cast and Orson's ego, as well as Richard's realization that whatever turn the show takes,he wants to be a 'part of it all.' This is well done, except for occasional bad line. For instance? "What's it like to be a beautiful woman?" Richard randomly asks Sonja. *Wince* What gutter did they pull that from? The only saving grace is that Sonja receives it as a bad line. Zac Efron starts out rather awkward in the first five minutes, delivering such off-kilter lines as 'you play with real feeling.' The heavily romanticized dialogue just doesn't feel natural, and it's a relief when the lines become smoother and wittier.

Christian McKay plays Orson Welles as perfectionistic, hard-headed, and childish. When he gets in a fight with his actors, he hollars at the top of his lungs, trademark spit spurting out of his mouth, "I am Orson Welles! And every single one of you stands as a adjinct to my vision!" Mm-kay... His unfailingly reasonable agent John Houseman (Eddie Marsan) tries to get through to him, but the bottem line is nothing that Orson Welles doesn't want to do will even be brought to the table. He is great character, and you see something sympathetic in him, then he throws you for a double loop. Me & Orson Welles is a historical film for people who don't have the time and patience for historical films, and establishes Zac Efron as an actor worthy of some respect (Rated PG-13.)