Wednesday, July 20, 2011

Film Week

A review of the films I've seen this past week.

This one at least feels more like a complete movie than this first did, and the mercenary decision to split the film in half provides a good lesson in how impossible it is to get everything into an adaptation, even with the running time being what it is. (Despite some teases in the first part, the film never gets into the darker implications of Dumbledore's back story, cutting all of that out entirely.) It's a wonderful end to a wonderful series, though it leaves me with surprisingly little to say. I think you know exactly what you're going to get out of it going in, and it didn't have any of the intensely boring passages of its predecessor. I still don't feel like I can rate it or the first one... I guess I'd go ***1/2 stars for the entire five-hour epic.

FAT HEAD (2009)
This homemade documentary does two very necessary things: it debunks the lipid hypothesis as a basis of nutritional science, and it refutes self-serving jackass Morgan Spurlock and his asinine character-piece-masquerading-as-a-documentary Super Size Me. The former is the important bit here, since Spurlock's self-aggrandizing idiocy and the way his film stretches credibility in a naked bid for stardom should be obvious. Filmmaker Tom Naughton here focuses on not only the science behind the modern diet industry, but the politics as well, highlighting a number of health-detrimental decisions the government has made based on either faulty research or scientific claims made for purely financial reasons. And I do appreciate Naughton's focus on personal responsibility; anyone who says the government needs to step in and regulate fast food and wasn't forced to eat cheeseburgers at gunpoint by Ronald McDonald needs to stop assuming everyone in the world is an infant. (Another point the film brings up that I found interesting: an anti-poor and even racist bias in the denouncement of fast food.) A fascinating, well-made, very funny, very necessary documentary. **** stars.

1 comment:

Tallulah Morehead said...

They didn't quite cut ALL of Dumbledore's backstory. They left that one tantalizing scene with Aberforth and the painting of Ariana, which connected up to nothing in the movie, and must be a huge head-scratcher for folks who haven't read the book.

I read one idiot review where the critic said how "Michael Gambon is in it in flashbacks, even ones that by rights, ought to be Richard Harris." Now there is some stupid film criticizm. Did he think that Dumbledore transformed himself between film 2 and film 3, or regenerated like Dr. Who or a phoenix, so that pre-CHAMBER OF SECRETS flashbacks "by rights" should be Richard Harris? Stupid. (And as stupidly applicable to the Wizengamort flashbacks of GOBLET OF FIRE.)