Well, I finally got to see Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon this weekend and... it was amazing. I absolutely loved this film. This is what happens when you let a master storyteller make an action film. Really, to call this simply an action film does not do the movie justice. It is a drama, a comedy, and a love story. Make that two love stories. All rolled into one. Michelle Yeoh and Chow Yun-Fat prove once again why they are two of Hong Kong cinema’s biggest stars. They are actors with great range. I encourage all of you to see this film when it hits a theater near you.

Li W. also had an opportunity to see the film...

"I saw a preview of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon on Thursday. While I love the movie’s look and feel and floating and flying acrobatics, I can’t give it an excellent rating, and I don’t think it will have mass appeal to American audiences. Here’s why: long exposition and a choppy story. The stunts raise the bar on action movies, but the director also tried to tell a story. The expositions were as long as 20 minutes to set up the characters and their motives! American audiences won’t stand for it. Only the diehard Hong Kong martial art enthusiasts will sit through it." -- Li Wright

I really hope Li is wrong about American audiences not being able to sit through CTHD. It is a real shame that we have become a people with such short attention spans. Personally, I think American directors could learn a lot from Ang Lee’s efforts to combine a, gasp, story with action. Are there long stretches in Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon in which no one is fighting and we get to know the characters, establish motive, and create drama? Yes. Isn’t that what you would look for in other genres? Why not incorporate it into an action movie? I’d really like to hear from anyone else who has seen the film. Do you think American audiences will embrace it or find it too slow?

Our next Civilian Voice belongs to Ben, who gives a recommendation of his own...

"I’d recommend folks seek out Boys Life 3. It’s a collection of five gay-themed short films. Unfortunately, Strand Releasing is playing it on a blank wall out behind a megaplex in the middle of East God’s Country, and they’ve bought almost no advertising. People will have to seek it out. But it’s definitely worth the effort. "I hope people won’t dismiss it because it’s gay themed. The first two editions of Boys Life were absolutely charming and/or engrossing. ‘Alkalai, Iowa’ from Boys Life 2 was one of the best films I’d seen that year, and that collection also featured the Oscar-winning ‘Trevor,’ which is both funny and heart-wrenching. Several of the actors and directors from the earlier editions went on to more high-profile careers, plus, you can catch name actors doing superb work, for peanuts, out of obvious love for the material. "Finally, if you don’t care for the film, it’ll be over in less than half an hour, and you’ll be on to something new..." -- Ben

Thanks, Ben. Boys Life 3 is actually playing at a theater near me, so I might just go see it after all. I have to admit that the trailers for the film did not pique my interest whatsoever. They feature two guys driving around in a van intercut with scenes from the shorts. You have absolutely no idea what the individual films are about, and if you are unfamiliar with the Boys Life series, you’re really left in the dark. An equally bad trailer, in my opinion, is the one for State and Main. Just doesn’t make me want to see the movie. And I love William H. Macy and Philip Seymour Hoffman. And while I’m on the subject of bad trailers -- what’s the deal with using modern music to sell a period piece? The trailers for both All the Pretty Horses and Chocolat feature songs by contemporary artists. Chocolat’s use of a Melissa Etheridge tune is the most offensive. Don’t get me wrong, I like Melissa Etheridge’s music, but what the hell does it have to do with a movie set in 1950s France? Anyone else feel like ranting about this ridiculous new trend in trailers?

Moving on...

EMHA joins the fight against Vertical Limit...

"I made the mistake of letting some friends from work talk me into going to see Vertical Limit Friday night, and let me tell you, it had me horizontal with boredom. This movie was so bad on so many levels! You had stereotypical, one dimensional, unlikable characters (yeah, O’Donnell, I’m talking about you!), every possible bad action-movie cliché (death, guilt, greed, money, bad guys, good guys, rescue mission with impossible odds, mystical Zen master who saves the day, etc.), and totally improbable scenarios (hey, let’s have a huge party with hundreds of people at the K2 base camp, yeah right!). The only moments I found to be entertaining were the action sequences, which were unfortunately sandwiched between the rest of the crap. The lesson here is that I should’ve listened to my gut and spent my $8.50 on Quills! -- EMHA

Next, our man Woodge is back again with his reviews of Proof of Life and Chocolat...

"Proof of Life: Living in a South American country is taking its toll on Peter and Alice Bowman’s marriage (David Morse and Meg Ryan), but when Peter is kidnapped by anti-government guerrillas, everything changes. Although Peter is the chief engineer for a new dam being built to control the region’s flooding problems, the guerrillas accuse him of being an oil company executive who’s trying to put a pipeline through the guerrillas’ secret, cocaine-producing farmland. Together with Peter’s sister (Pamela Reed), Alice hires a professional "K&R (kidnap and ransom) negotiator" to obtain Peter’s release. The negotiator is Terry Thorne (Russell Crowe), a smart, extremely capable tough guy fresh from a perilous assignment in Chechnya. "Though not perfect, Proof of Life is a satisfying action/drama backed by an involving story. The movie was inspired by both a Vanity Fair article, William Prochnau’s "Adventures in the Ransom Trade," and a book called The Long March to Freedom by Thomas Hargrove. Meg Ryan forgoes the usual cutesy stuff and succeeds in her role as the anguished wife, but it’s Russell Crowe who is the most commanding presence on screen. David Morse also turns in strong performance. And David Caruso’s live-wire character was enjoyable too. But a strong cast isn’t everything. Proof of Life is somewhat bogged down by its unhurried pacing, and it is not chock-full of action scenes. Furthermore, I didn’t find the sexual tension between Meg Ryan and Russell Crowe to be completely convincing. On the other hand, it was handled with subtlety and understatement. There was nothing to make a viewer go ‘Oh, c’mon, that wouldn’t happen!’ On the contrary, one thing Proof of Life succeeds at is verisimilitude. And the climactic finish is excellent. "Chocolat: With a title like Chocolat, it’s too easy to call this movie a light-hearted confection, yet that is what it is. Chocolat begins in fairy-tale fashion with a narrator describing the tranquil French village that is home to the timid townspeople who tow the line of propriety set by the dour mayor, Le Comte de Reynaud (Alfred Molina). But when Vianne (Juliette Binoche) and her daughter Anouk (Victoire Thivisol) blow into town on ‘a clever north wind’ and set up a chocolate shop across from the church, Reynaud’s hold on the village begins to weaken. Beginning with her skeptical landlady (Judi Dench), Vianne is soon changing lives for the better with her decadent confections. Her nonconformist ways cause Reynaud and a few other unenlightened souls much chagrin and they do what they can to thwart her. Chocolat’s simple story is told with liberal sprinkles of humor and a few dollops of drama. The fact that this movie is set in France yet is spoken in English adds to its fairy-tale atmosphere. With its message of tolerance, this sweet tale is perfectly suited to the holiday season." -- Woodge

Woodge has informed me that he is going to be going out of town for a few weeks and won’t be able to contribute to Civilian Voices for a little while. So the rest of you are just going to have to pick up the slack. Also, Woodge posed a great question in a recent e-mail to me. How many movies do Civilian Voices readers see each month? Let’s make this our first official Civilian Voices poll. Send me your answer, and we’ll see how we rank against the national average.

Alex sends us his prediction for the future fate of Dungeons & Dragons...

"I, too, am one of the unfortunate to have seen Dungeons & Dragons on its opening weekend. The movie was bad. Very bad. We all know that. It’s been established. Now, how long before it becomes a midnight cult classic? This movie has all the over-the-top bad acting of an Ed Wood film, including the appearance of Jeremy Irons (whom I kept expecting to yell out "I’m your Auntie Mame!" whenever he entered a scene), and it probably should have gone direct to home video. Which makes it perfect fodder for people to go running to it for that Midnight Movie appeal. "Picture it...guys standing in line with pointy ears and blue lipstick. Everyone brooding. And comments flung at the screen like some sort of cross between Rocky Horror (complete with cameo appearance by Riff Raff Richard O’Brien) and Mystery Science Theater 3000. Plus, there’s added insights. Could cookies be tossed at the screen when we discover there’s elfin magic inside that hollow tree in which Doctor Who’s Tom Baker resides? And could a humming of the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" through Zoe McLellan’s touching ‘we’re not fighting for some treasure, we’re fighting for freedom’ possibly be far behind? "Throw in the classic Jar Jar Binks line "Mesa people gonna die?" every time Marlon Wayans does something ‘wacky’ on screen, and it’s prime material for loads of midnight enjoyment. "This movie is terrible. Let us celebrate its badness. "On a side note, The Rock has everything going for him as a big-name action hero. He has the look, the smile, and the build. But he should remain billed as The Rock, as opposed to his real name, Dwayne Johnson. Face it: no one is going to want to be saved from hordes of terrorists who’ve captured the Christmas party/plane/private school/White House by a guy who has the same name as a character from What’s Happening." -- Alex

Gotta agree with you about The Rock, Alex. Dwayne Johnson isn’t a bad name; it just doesn’t scream out action star. I think The Rock does have a shot at becoming a feature-film heavyweight. We’ll have to wait until The Mummy Returns to find out for sure. Weighing in with her choice for the next action hero is Denise P.

"Guy Pearce is the Aussie who can combine action and sensitivity. Russell who?" -- Denise M. Perry

Who else thinks Guy Pearce could run circles around Russell Crowe? I think he’d have to hit the weights a little more to take on Mr. Gladiator, but that’s just me. Robin S. has this to say about our next big action hero...

"Here’s my take on the direction of action movies and the prospects for the next action star. Last summer, a good friend of mine insisted that I see Terminator and T2. When we saw those movies together on DVD (his umpteenth viewing; my first), I was appalled. Plain and simple, it was havoc and mayhem played out on the screen without justification. To me, there was no pretense or excuse, just gratuitous violence. By contrast, I came of age in 1996 watching Independence Day, with its impressive action and patriotic story. A revealing difference was that ID4 lacked the big-star name that T2 had. "Point is that I’m not sure there is space for an action star to replace Schwarzenegger or Stallone. For the formula to work, you must also have a knowledgeable producer (like Bruckheimer or Silver) and/or director (like Bay or Petersen), someone who knows how the genre functions. "Big-name actors in the late 1990s have maintained their status because of cross-genre versatility. Bruce Willis moved away from the one-dimensional macho guy of Die Hard into a combination of comedy, drama, and adventure. Schwarzenegger’s star is falling because he really can’t depict more-developed protagonists. A film like The 6th Day, one that’s trying to develop a theme along with the action, actually suffers from Schwarzenegger’s all-action baggage. He can’t move out of a dead genre. "If Hollywood wants to shake up the old guard, my suggestion would be to develop some projects that include multiple stars. Now, sure, some big egos would have to share screen time, and some huge stars might have to take the role of a villain (and, gasp, maybe even die at the end). But I think the experiment would work. I would like to see Nicolas Cage and Bruce Willis do a comedy together: their styles are so antithetical that they would provide excellent character foils. I could go for Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt facing off in the next Mission: Impossible. This kind of project has enjoyed critical and/or commercial success on previous occasions (Face/Off, Stepmom, The Insider). Creative financing could be worked out to make this kind of film affordable (reduced salaries up front, a greater percentage of gross). And we would forget the era of unrestrained movie violence, an era that seems awfully excessive with historical distance. -- Robin S.

There would need to be some very creative financing, or a very respected director -- see Steven Soderbergh and the remake of Ocean’s Eleven -- to bring some of Hollywood’s bigger stars together in one film. But, if money were no object, which stars would you like to see paired up and in what kind of film?

Finally, Dave has the last Civilian word with his comments on the overrated The Perfect Storm and the underrated Space Cowboys. Plus, he gives us his top ten...

"The problem with this year has been that many of the movies have gotten worse and worse the more I’ve thought about them. The Perfect Storm is an example. It was one of the top three or four most-anticipated movies on my list and, seeing it, I was somewhat engaged in the story and the telling of it. However, it didn’t move me as much as I had hoped. Not only that, the final ten minutes contained some of the most overly sentimental stuff I’ve seen in a while. The effects were good, sure, but the cinematography by the great John Seale looked kinda Hollywood gritty and not real. As for the men, the subplots were uninteresting and there was no honest bonding like the kind in Jaws. "On the other hand, Space Cowboys was, despite its positive reviews and good box office, quite underrated. I found it to be an enjoyable experience. It had a relaxed quality that was refreshing and it was fun to watch all the actors engage in a somewhat old-fashioned story. It was the first time in a few years that Eastwood has been able to satirize his trademark gruffness without overplaying it and making it who his character is. "This is the first year where I can really only remember the great movies I saw and not all the movies. It has been a year where the bad stuff has been really bad and the good stuff not even as good as the good stuff from previous years. Get it? So, as I say good-bye to the year that EW predicted would ride on the shoulders of genius that was 1999, and without having seen many of the holiday releases, I give you my picks for the best films of the year, thus far: 10.Time Code 9. Requiem for a Dream 8. Waking the Dead 7. The Cell 6. Erin Brockovich 5. Keeping the Faith 4. Jesus’ Son 3. Wonder Boys 2. Almost Famous 1. High Fidelity -- Dave

The year 2000 is coming to a close. Good lord, where did the time go? It seems like only yesterday I was stockpiling water and ammunition. Now I’m about to compile my Top Ten and Worst Ten Lists. How about sending me your picks for best and worst of the year, as well as your overall opinion of the state of the movies in the year 2000? Don’t forget to answer some of the questions posed in today’s column. How many movies do you see a month? Which big stars would you like to see in a film together? Will American audiences embrace Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon? And finally, what’s the deal with using modern music to sell a period piece? Send me an e-mail, won’t ya?

 

Send your submissions to civilianvoices@roughcut.com

No purchase necessary. Void where prohibited. Must be age 16 or older to submit a story. Stories will be edited for length and content by representatives of Roughcut. Not all stories will appear online. By submitting this story you agree that Roughcut has the perpetual right to use the submitted story, in any and all media, without limitation, as Roughcut may determine in its sole discretion. You also acknowledge that you will not receive any monetary compensation for the use, if any, of your story.