Thursday, June 22, 2006
North Country
Spoiler-free plot synopsis: Charlize Theron plays the daughter of a miner who takes a job at a local mine and ends up in a living hell dealing with the worst imaginable kinds of sexual harassment. In fact the word “harassment” is way to light a word. More like gender-based torture. Theron, who, in the opinion of this author, is rather nice looking, has followed Brad Pitt’s lead and tried to take roles that downplay her beauty and play up her acting chops. In a way that makes her the perfect person to play this role. She has to fight against the way the world sees her to succeed in real life and in the movie. Of course, that’s where the similarities between she and her character end.
The movie is a harsh portrayal of life for a woman in this mine and claims to be based on a true story. The movie follows how she starts at the mine, the suffering for her and her fellow female workers, and then the lawsuit that follows, which is based on an actual suit that set some important precedents for sexual harassment cases nationwide.
Advertising/Expectations: I’m a fan of Theron, so when I saw she was in it, especially when I saw she wasn’t playing a super glam role, I was interested. Throw in my interest in this area of the law and some good reviews and I was even more interested. The fact, however, that it was going to deal with the legal side of things also lowered my expectations as I have become all to used to Hollywood botching legal movies.
Tangent Alert, Alert, Alert.
There are not very many good “legal” movies, loosely defined as movies that deal with lawyers and/or the courtroom. As many of my friends and former Business Law students know, I believe the finest legal movie ever made is “My Cousin Vinny.” You can learn all you need to know about how to handle a court room from that movie, plus the wardrobe is faaaaaantastic. …
ok, back to our regularly scheduled programming.
Storytelling: Some good and bad here. It does a good job of painting the picture of desperation. You get some good character development with Charlize and her son. It does a good job of showing the pain her father feels not knowing whether to cut her off or stand up for her. Very few wasted scenes. All of them advance the overall point of showing how hard it would have been to stand up for herself the way she did. However, the lawsuit aspect became more of a distraction than a benefit to the story. At first it was a useful device to provide a context for the rest of the story, but then it was like the writers realized, “hey wait, how do we show what happened in a few scenes, keep the drama and still wrap this up in less time than it would take to give an opening statement if this were a real case?” Unfortunately, they didn’t have the answer. Woody from Cheers is fairly unbelievable as an attorney. The court room cross-exam of one of the main predators was painful it was so fake. And I’m not just poo-pooing this stuff because I’m a lawyer and “that’s not really how it is”. It was just bad cinema. The writing was bad, it didn’t even resemble an actual legal hearing and worst of all it didn’t significantly add to the story.
Acting/Casting: Charlize was great. She was believably pretty but not too pretty and was the right mix of tough, charming, feminine, and sympathetic. No complaints there. Her father and son also turned in top-notch performances. I have to really give props, though, to Frances McDormant (sp?). She’s the pregnant sheriff from Fargo. She was outstanding. The subtle twitch of pain when she is swallowing her pride in the face of disgusting jokes aimed at her, the defiance coping with…well, to avoid a minor spoiler, let’s just say coping. She made you buy that she was tough, but also showed you that being tough doesn’t mean you don’t feel the pain, it just means you deal with it.
Writing: The writing in North Country was fairly mediocre. The dialogue rang mostly true, though there was nothing special about it. Not like I expect the people of this mining town to suddenly be speaking in flowery poetry, but some choice and quotable turns of phrase would have been nice. As mentioned above, the court room scenes were nearly unwatchable because of how bad the writing was. Woody’s bit about being yellow was brutal.
Directing: Good work here. The movie moved at the right pace and had the right mix of tough scenes to watch broken up by touching scenes of happiness and then the completely different look of the court room. I like that it showed the various “types” of women that would work in a place like that without spiraling completely into caricatures. It was honest with the violence without just going for shock value. The use of flashbacks in certain places worked well as they were few and to the point. It took time to show you the look of the town and the mine which really added to the whole feel of the movie. Well done here.
Visuals: As mentioned above, there were good shots of the town and the setting as well as the mine. The scope of the mine and the general grayness of everything contributed to the sense of depression and despair that underlie the whole movie. It was Paul Simon’s brilliant “My Little Town” come to life on the big screen: “and after it rains, there’s a rainbow and all of the colors are black. It’s not that the colors aren’t there. It’s just imagination they lack. Everything’s the same back, in my little town.” For a movie that lacked special effects or vivid sets and costumes, this movie’s look really stands out and contributed greatly to what was good about this movie.
Sound: Actually, I don’t even remember about the sound in North Country. I think there were a couple good ‘80s tunes, but I don’t think it was a major factor either way.
Need for Screen: The big screen helps in this movie. Wide shots of the mine and areas around town really jump out at you. It’s gone from the theaters, but if you have a friend with a big screen, make an excuse to watch this at their place.
Gut feel: I felt disappointed after this one. I think the court side of the story just ended so abruptly and for me so dissatisfactory, that it tainted my feeling about the whole movie. The other overwhelming feeling was shame about how my gender behaves at times. If you are a man and don’t want to take a few of these “good old boys” out behind the woodshed for a little “re-education”, then I’m not sure we can be friends.
Who you should bring: For this movie though, it doesn’t matter a whole lot. I guess the one thing I would say, is watch it with adults. The scenes and subject matter are fairly graphic and very adult. Not in a pornographic way or anything, but there are some images you don’t want to share with children. Also, the movie moves slowly. This is actually a good thing for this particular movie, but many Gen Xers and younger demand a quicker pace in their movie watching and this one is likely to make them irritated, which will likely make them irritating and you won’t enjoy the movie.
1-10 Score: 7 – Basically a 7 means it was worth watching, but had some fairly significant flaws.
The movie is a harsh portrayal of life for a woman in this mine and claims to be based on a true story. The movie follows how she starts at the mine, the suffering for her and her fellow female workers, and then the lawsuit that follows, which is based on an actual suit that set some important precedents for sexual harassment cases nationwide.
Advertising/Expectations: I’m a fan of Theron, so when I saw she was in it, especially when I saw she wasn’t playing a super glam role, I was interested. Throw in my interest in this area of the law and some good reviews and I was even more interested. The fact, however, that it was going to deal with the legal side of things also lowered my expectations as I have become all to used to Hollywood botching legal movies.
Tangent Alert, Alert, Alert.
There are not very many good “legal” movies, loosely defined as movies that deal with lawyers and/or the courtroom. As many of my friends and former Business Law students know, I believe the finest legal movie ever made is “My Cousin Vinny.” You can learn all you need to know about how to handle a court room from that movie, plus the wardrobe is faaaaaantastic. …
ok, back to our regularly scheduled programming.
Storytelling: Some good and bad here. It does a good job of painting the picture of desperation. You get some good character development with Charlize and her son. It does a good job of showing the pain her father feels not knowing whether to cut her off or stand up for her. Very few wasted scenes. All of them advance the overall point of showing how hard it would have been to stand up for herself the way she did. However, the lawsuit aspect became more of a distraction than a benefit to the story. At first it was a useful device to provide a context for the rest of the story, but then it was like the writers realized, “hey wait, how do we show what happened in a few scenes, keep the drama and still wrap this up in less time than it would take to give an opening statement if this were a real case?” Unfortunately, they didn’t have the answer. Woody from Cheers is fairly unbelievable as an attorney. The court room cross-exam of one of the main predators was painful it was so fake. And I’m not just poo-pooing this stuff because I’m a lawyer and “that’s not really how it is”. It was just bad cinema. The writing was bad, it didn’t even resemble an actual legal hearing and worst of all it didn’t significantly add to the story.
Acting/Casting: Charlize was great. She was believably pretty but not too pretty and was the right mix of tough, charming, feminine, and sympathetic. No complaints there. Her father and son also turned in top-notch performances. I have to really give props, though, to Frances McDormant (sp?). She’s the pregnant sheriff from Fargo. She was outstanding. The subtle twitch of pain when she is swallowing her pride in the face of disgusting jokes aimed at her, the defiance coping with…well, to avoid a minor spoiler, let’s just say coping. She made you buy that she was tough, but also showed you that being tough doesn’t mean you don’t feel the pain, it just means you deal with it.
Writing: The writing in North Country was fairly mediocre. The dialogue rang mostly true, though there was nothing special about it. Not like I expect the people of this mining town to suddenly be speaking in flowery poetry, but some choice and quotable turns of phrase would have been nice. As mentioned above, the court room scenes were nearly unwatchable because of how bad the writing was. Woody’s bit about being yellow was brutal.
Directing: Good work here. The movie moved at the right pace and had the right mix of tough scenes to watch broken up by touching scenes of happiness and then the completely different look of the court room. I like that it showed the various “types” of women that would work in a place like that without spiraling completely into caricatures. It was honest with the violence without just going for shock value. The use of flashbacks in certain places worked well as they were few and to the point. It took time to show you the look of the town and the mine which really added to the whole feel of the movie. Well done here.
Visuals: As mentioned above, there were good shots of the town and the setting as well as the mine. The scope of the mine and the general grayness of everything contributed to the sense of depression and despair that underlie the whole movie. It was Paul Simon’s brilliant “My Little Town” come to life on the big screen: “and after it rains, there’s a rainbow and all of the colors are black. It’s not that the colors aren’t there. It’s just imagination they lack. Everything’s the same back, in my little town.” For a movie that lacked special effects or vivid sets and costumes, this movie’s look really stands out and contributed greatly to what was good about this movie.
Sound: Actually, I don’t even remember about the sound in North Country. I think there were a couple good ‘80s tunes, but I don’t think it was a major factor either way.
Need for Screen: The big screen helps in this movie. Wide shots of the mine and areas around town really jump out at you. It’s gone from the theaters, but if you have a friend with a big screen, make an excuse to watch this at their place.
Gut feel: I felt disappointed after this one. I think the court side of the story just ended so abruptly and for me so dissatisfactory, that it tainted my feeling about the whole movie. The other overwhelming feeling was shame about how my gender behaves at times. If you are a man and don’t want to take a few of these “good old boys” out behind the woodshed for a little “re-education”, then I’m not sure we can be friends.
Who you should bring: For this movie though, it doesn’t matter a whole lot. I guess the one thing I would say, is watch it with adults. The scenes and subject matter are fairly graphic and very adult. Not in a pornographic way or anything, but there are some images you don’t want to share with children. Also, the movie moves slowly. This is actually a good thing for this particular movie, but many Gen Xers and younger demand a quicker pace in their movie watching and this one is likely to make them irritated, which will likely make them irritating and you won’t enjoy the movie.
1-10 Score: 7 – Basically a 7 means it was worth watching, but had some fairly significant flaws.
# posted by Josh Stump : 9:25 PM
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
