Cache (Hidden)

Yesterday I watched Cache (Hidden) (2005), a French film about a successful family being stalked by a mysterious person. The film stars Daniel Auteli (Girl on the Bridge) and Juliette Binoche (has appeared in several great films since the late 80's) as a couple that are professionally successful but are bored with their marriage. Together they raise their typically petulant teenage son. The mystery starts with them receiving video tapes showing surveillance on their home wrapped in childlike pictures of a boy throwing up blood. The pictures start being sent to their work and schools as well as more videotapes and phone calls. The pictures and calls begin to point to something in Auteli's past.

Cache hangs together well as a mystery, dolling out little bits of information while maintaining a feeling of dread. The movie builds the tension through strong performances by Auteli and Binoche as rational adults at their wits end and extended shots of locations (schools, homes) filmed from a distance with no obvious reason at times. The movie treats the audience as following the proverbial carrot on a stick, I found myself straining to see what was happening on screen and rewinding dialogue to figure out what was happening. As a mystery, it's well planned and executed but ultimately unrewarding at that level. In fact, when the antagonist was revealed I thought it was a bit silly compared to the tension the film built up beforehand.

But, the movie isn't really about the mystery. A mystery that's not a mystery...that's a new one. The movie is really about how the mystery brings out the secrets of these people, the hidden side of people that on the surface are perfect examples of upper middle class happiness. On this level, the movie surpasses expectations as the characters come to life in realistic and relateable ways. I felt for these characters as people and liked how the mystery plot device was used to show how these characters felt about their lives. Along the lines of say Muholland Drive or Memento, the movie brings up enough cliches to hook you and then ditches them in favor of something new. Good stuff!

The DaBoring Code

About a year ago my mother in law bought me a copy of the DaVinci Code by Dan Brown. DaVinci Code was one of those books that hit you with a big display the second you walked into Borders or Barnes and Noble and a nonreading guy like me thought "That looks boring." But, since I was reading it for free I gave it a try and found I liked it. The book excelled at creating it's own world of secret societies, alternate histories and little logic puzzles. I don't pretend to be a scholar of anything legitimately academic so I can't argue for or against what the book claims, but I found it a fun read just the same. It successfully created excitement, tension and mystery. And since I'm not religious, the Church bashing built into the storyline didn't bother me.

Well, the book was such a hit with readers that Hollywood decided to make a Ron Howard movie out of it. Ron Howard, a respected director that makes humanistic, middle of the road, positive message films (Apollo 13!) tackling a book that suggests Jesus was a man and not the Son of God sounded interesting. Tom Hanks, a guy who wins Best Actor Oscars like most people breathe air, was chosen as the lead actor. Audrey Tautou, the French impish ingenue of Amelie (2002) came aboard as the female lead. This movie had so much pedigree. So much potential. So much controversy. So boring.

The movie sucks the life out of the novel revealing all the weak points of the book. Naturally, a book that delves as much into History with a capital H cannot have everything make it to the screen. With a book like this, the script is automatically regulated to becoming Cliff Notes to what was originally written. But, without the pseudo-intellectual hoo hah, what's left is a pretty standard chase thriller with sketchy characters forever rambling expository dialogue. At least Ian MacKellen (Magneto!) looked like he was having fun hamming it up as a disabled historian.

To compound the problem, Howard downplays most of the interesting parts. All of the "shocking" bits of self mutilation, Eyes Wide Shut (2001) style sex societies and religous conspiracy take a backseat to Tom Hanks jet black hair helmet. Hanks uses his Oscar validated talent to give a hollow Harrison Ford impersonation. All the Ford hallmarks (the mind racing pauses, finger pointing, the uptight yet shambolic stride) show up. Since Dan Brown allegedly based the lead character on Ford, I guess that shouldn't be surprising. I just haven't seen an actor slavishly imitate another so vividly since Travolta and Cage went at it in Face Off (1998).

DaVinci Code-the movie is the equivalent of being stuck in an elevator with an insane conspiracy theorist. The guy who's like "You think you know history, but I KNOW HISTORY and if you knew what I knew the World would be Anarchy my friend." Like meeting Dennis Hopper if he was like the characters in all those movies he's in.

The DaVinci Code did do one thing for me, it reminded me that there are many different points of view to History and that it doesn't have to be accepted at face value. Even what DaVinci Code claims shouldn't be taken that way, it's not like Leonardo DaVinci was actually at the Last Supper he painted it out of his imagination. So I learned something. And now I know. And knowing is half the battle!

Rush - Snakes and Arrows

This week I picked up the new Rush disc, Snakes & Arrows (2007)which has to be like the billionth Rush album. Like AC/DC,Rush is a band that has lasted for decades due to a singular commitment to a unique sound. The winning sound is a sort of Cream style power trio with virtuoso musicians and prog rock tendencies. Their sound has evolved over the years and adapted to new styles, yet the lyrical themes of hard won individuality set to a driving bass line, slashing / shimmering guitars and rapid fire drumwork still holds up.

Best of all, Rush has managed to retain their focus on tightly structured performances. They've managed to deliver an album that shows a touch of restraint and refinement yet remain a rock band. Re-energized coming off their covers EP Feedback (2004), the band sounds driven and conmfortable in the best of possible ways.

The disc features the lead track, "Far Cry", a traditional style Rush first single not too far removed from classics like "Subdivisions" or "Force Ten". A fast beat, Geddy Lee's shrieky vocals and some great instrumental interplay make the song memorable. Other highlights include the guitar driven instrumental "The Main Monkey Business" and the vaguely "YYZ"ish "Malignant Narcissism". Rush dips into some blues influence for the first time since the 70's on the strong "The Way The Wind Blows". My personal favorite on the disc is "Faithless", a great song about self determination of positive moral values.

This Rush is a big improvement over the nu-metal influenced Vapor Trails (2002) as that album was too brittle sounding. Like Tool's left overs, it seemed to try to hard to be relevant. Snakes & Arrows finds Rush motivated to carry on with the same vision and vigor they have had for the past 3 decades. Their approach still has enough flashy technical wankering to keep most fans happy, but it has been tempered by maturity. The lyrics theme (Keeping hope alive in the face of serious spirtual or political strife)are relevant and thought provoking.

Rush play with natural empathy that comes from ages of playing together. Geddy Lee, Neal Peart and Alex Lifeson remain on top of their game, with Lifeson even showing some hints of alternative rock in his guitar noodling. It's hard to believe a band this age doesn't sound tired, but Rush continues their legacy with another strong album. To check out the video for "Far Cry", just click below!