The Station Agent

Chris’s review of The Station Agent

I chose The Station Agent for our group for a simple reason: I had a vague recollection that it was supposed to be a critically-acclaimed film, and that was all I knew. So this was a rare movie where I entered with no real expectations of genre or plot or tone—creating some level of “I don’t know what’s coming” anticipation that was a minor delight before I started watching.

In the early scenes, I was concerned that my anticipation wouldn’t be rewarded. The repetition of minor humiliations for Peter Dinklage’s protagonist felt anachronistic and maybe a bit dishonest, for a big-city progressive like me. Yes, he’s a small person. I get it. But would that shade every single interaction he has with every human, child or adult? I don’t know. Perhaps. Maybe in watching this knowing a minor bit about Peter Dinklage today (Game of Thrones warrior stud royal) makes it hard to see him as someone who would be so put upon by society. Anyhow, that was an early obstacle for me, and it pulled me somewhat out of the story.

I saw some irony in Dinklage’s character fixing miniature trains for a living.

[An aside: a dwarf actor with the last name Dinklage (like “dinky”) seems too “on the nose” to be believable. It’s like a politician who sends ladies text messages of his privates having the name Anthony Weiner. Can’t be real.]

That said, the overall tone of quiet moments, with small incremental character changes, won me over. We watched this over two nights, stopping at 45 minutes on night #1. Up to that point, Dinklage’s character had not smiled once, while consistently rejecting good people who simply want to connect with him. 

Almost immediately on night #2, he smiled, and this became an entirely different movie, and now I was invested. I wanted him to be happy, and not alone. I found the back half of the movie movingly dramatic. Once he had his first taste of companionship, it was aching to see him go from tentatively/cautiously responding, to being disappointed/rejected, to retreating again, to ultimately seeking out friends. A rewarding journey.

Bobby Canavale’s happy-go-lucky food truck dude is the kind of friend everyone loves, and added some much-needed lightness to every scene he was in. To me, he’s the soul of the movie, and the archetype of “people can be good”. Even when he was bad (standing up Dinklage at the bar), he was good (helping his sick dad). 

Patricia Clarkson seems to have a knack for only picking good roles. Although this was Dinklage’s story, I appreciated the complexity of her character, with her alternating from seeking out others to wanting to be alone. Given the death of her child, I felt that her shifting character needs (though extreme) felt honest. She was struggling through life, sometimes alone, sometimes not. 

I was glad our story tellers didn’t feel the need to consummate the platonic love triangle among this group of friends. It was clever to have Dinklage’s character acknowledge that he wasn’t a virgin; without that revelation, I might have found myself rooting for him to find a first lover, which is not what the story needed.

If he actually ended up with Michele Williams the librarian, more power to him. Like Tupac used to say: Hell naw, I ain’t mad at cha.

All in all, I see this as A-minus film. I might appreciate seeing it again one day. But tonight, I’ll be watching Ep 7 of True Detective, which I’d love to talk about with you fine people some time.

Amelie

Amelie

Participants: Blair, Chris, Kara, Sara, Andrew and Shane

So, first let me explain my rating scale (at least how I'm using it now, as I'm sure it will evolve as this blog continues).  I think if I'm going to give something an A range rating, I'll have thought about the movie, specific scenes, characters, etc days after watching.  It will make me think, question, critique, etc.  A C rating is just that - it's average, I would watch it again, but it's maybe not thought provoking.  An F would have to be a long the lines of "Bachelorette" something Netflix just "suggested" to me (I think I Fail Netflix).  It was horrible and nothing redeeming in it and if I watched it again, it would be punishing myself.

On with the review:  I haven't thought much about Amelia since the movie viewing, other than, "oh, I need to write my review," and then I've spent a few minutes thinking about how weird - in a good way - the characters were.  After finishing a film, I will often think, "damn, that was good/interesting/etc, I need to watch that again!" I did not think that with this movie...

So, it sounds like I'm about to give Amelia a bad review, but that's not the case.  I must say first that I actually should watch this movie again - I'm a terribly slow reader and it took me more than a minute to get used to reading the English subtitles.  Somehow I did not realize this movie was in French (idiot!); because of this and my inability to read quickly, this film was at a disadvantage.  I should also note that I was thoroughly thrown off by the opening credits/ intro story with the pregnant belly growing and the cheesy baby...yuck.  I HAVE thought about that.

What I loved - the dry sense of humor was awesome and thoroughly enjoyable throughout.  I liked the weird characters, no one was "normal," they all had weird quirks, which I liked.  I loved all the little stories of her helping people and the give/take relationship she had with the old dude and her eventually helping herself.  What I thought was missing - some meat to these characters.  I don't know why they do what they do, or how they've arrived in the places they are in.  I see how they fit together now, and maybe that's the point.  I'm sure the movie is purposely vague and I'm the dummy who is not getting the real story here, but help me out!  I want more depth.

With these thoughts, I rate Amelia a C+/B-, I would watch it again and enjoy it, but it's not something I would think to bring up over dinner to discuss.   It is however, a good movie to have in the books, I feel like classy people must have watched this film and liked it.

Not Church Music

After talking to you guys about the movie review blog that Sara and myself are involved in with some buddies from home, Blair and I really thought it would be a lot of fun to do a blog with you all as well. It would be similar in nature to my other blog, but a bit less time demanding since we have all children running around. (Well I don't, but Blair does as I technically count as a child.) Here is a link to our other blog. The reviews for Warm Bodies and Only God Forgives would be the general format.

http://mediocrityatthemovies.blogspot.com/

Really, a review could be done however you want it. There is no formality. Whatever makes a movie good or bad in your opinion is what I think we're all interested in hearing about.

I propose the following rules/standards/guidelines:

1 person proposes a movie. That movie should be easily accessible. Netflix, HBOGo, Hulu (free) Redbox (it's only a dollar or so!) or whatever.

We then have a week to watch it.

After that week, we go in a set order in giving opinions. Each person would have 48 hours after the person before them to write an opinion. After the first round is over, the floor is opened to everyone to reply to whoever, change their opinon, etc.

Then we suggest a new flick and start it over.

Most importantly, we all understand that life is busy. If someone just doesn't have the time, no worries. It's completely understandable. Chime in when you can. The whole point is to tap in to that intellectual, creative and fun side of writing that we all haven't been able to do since undergrad English courses.

I have to say, I'm really looking forward to it. I know Blair is as well.

My proposed set order:
Blair
Chris
Kara
Sara
Andrew
Shane