hprill Reviews

Tokyo Decadence (1992)

Puzzling

[4/10 · 24 August 2009]

I've only seen the heavily edited 85-minute German version of this film, which is, above all, puzzling. With 50 minutes missing in comparison to the original Japanese version, this version contains not even two thirds of the original plot, making it and an abstract, seemingly disconnected sequence of unerotic S/M scenes and fragments of a plot showing a woman's life falling apart. There is a certain appeal in this abstractness in that it makes the main character's motivations completely enigmatic and lends a surreal touch to some of the scenes (what was that clairvoyante all about?), but my guess is that the full version must be an entirely different film, and probably a better one than what I have seen.

I can't say anything about the "real" movie, but even though it shows some sort of potential, the edited version comes across as mostly pointless.

Ek Hasina Thi (2004)

Decent, taut revenge thriller

[8/10 · 25 January 2005]

From producer Ram Gopal Varma and director Sriram Raghavan comes a pretty good revenge thriller, which is definitely one of the better Indian movies this year.

Cast against his usual roles, Saif Ali Khan plays a slick criminal whose dealings with terrorists and the Delhi underworld get his girlfriend Sarika (Urmila Matondkar) into prison. However, toughened by prison life, Sarika manages to escape and takes revenge.

Progressing somewhat slowly during the first 15 minutes, but then gaining momentum at an increasing pace, this movie never slows down and manages to keep your interest for the full duration, which at only 120 minutes is significantly less than most Bollywood movies. There are also no disruptive song or dance sequences that would distract you from the plot.

In fact, one of the problems that I have with this movie is that it is a bit too short -- in particular the prison sequence seems rushed: Sarika's character development from the innocent, naive girl to the tough, cold-blooded killer is not fully developed and feels a bit sudden as a result.

My second problem is with the ending, which, while not inappropriate, feels a bit out of line with her previous revenge strategy. It still works fine, but one feels that it could have been built up better.

Other than that, however, there are no obvious problems with the plot, and acting is good from most main and supporting actors. Seema Biswas in particularly stands out in her role as the determined female police officer in pursuit of Sarika.

Definitely worth watching, and much better than anything Hollywood, USA has produced in this genre in a long time.

The Bourne Supremacy (2004)

Not bad at all

[8/10 · 1 November 2004]

I always hesitate to praise movies from the spy thriller/action movie category like this one, mostly because they're all about adrenalin release rather than plot or character development, but saying that, The Bourne Supremacy isn't bad at all.

A fast pace is set at the very beginning, and the pace never slows down, the plot always stays taut, and there are no noticeable lengths of any kind. I still like Matt Damon in the role -- don't ask me why, but I still think he has the perfect face for the role, a cross between a hint of childlike innocence and dark determination, something he also had in The Talented Mr Ripley. He meets a perfect match in Joan Allen, who shows similar determination.

The hand-held camera work has been criticized, but I never found it annoying or distracting, it always seemed to be just right.

And yes, there are plot holes, plenty of them -- the indestructibility of Jason Bourne being the major one, but there's also a totally unnecessary murder that's not only unmotivated and out of character, but also seems to serve no particular purpose other than allowing the killer to die later on.

But all of that doesn't make this a bad movie; in fact if there's a future for the spy thriller formula, I figure it's in movie like this rather than in the James Bond franchise, which has clearly been worn out to the limits.

MINOR SPOILER: if you intend to watch this for Franka Potente, don't. She doesn't have as much screen time as you'd expect from an actor whose name appears second in the credits.

If you watch this because you want a fast-paced action movie, go for it. There are no surprises, no plot twists, but you'll get 90 minutes of solid action that are worth the ticket price. 8/10, easily.

Tell Me I'm Pretty (2004)

Fresh French comedy with two endearing main characters

[8/10 · 13 August 2004]

One of the better French films this year, a refreshingly funny comedy about Fanny and Paul, two people in their mid-thirties and their not entirely straightforward way of trying to start a relationship.

This is strictly a two-character movie (if you don't count the voices of the annoying couple upstairs), and all of it takes place on just one evening and the following morning. This may seem a very minimalist concept to begin with, and it certainly wouldn't work with comedians of a smaller calibre that Marina Foïs and Julien Boisselier, but the two of them excel in their roles as somewhat quirky, but still totally believable and entirely likable thirty-somethings who had their disappointments in relationships and now don't seem to know what to do with one another.

It's this interplay of one character taking the initiative and the other one instantly trying to wiggle his/her way out of it (and ten minutes later vice versa) and the clumsiness with which things happen or don't happen, plus the deadpan humour that makes this movie so successful.

Don't expect a movie with a lot of depth and substance. Expect to meet two endearing characters with whom you can almost instantly identify, expect witty dialogues and humour that will never sink below a certain level (even when the condom gets caught in the guitar strings), expect to laugh a lot and to cry a little.

Certainly worth seeing. 8/10.

Zanjeer (1973)

Good movie, but Amitabh has done better

[5/10 · 19 April 2004]

Despite a taut script and lots of action, both of which make sure that this film never gets boring, this movie is a bit too caught up in clichés and stereotypes to ever transgress the "obsessed good guy tracks down fundamentally evil bad guy" scheme, which is a bit of a pity. Nevertheless, it managed to establish Amitabh Bachchan as the "angry young man" of 1970s Indian cinema.

Sadly, the talent of Jaya Bhaduri is totally wasted except for her entry scene and a split second at the end - surely a knife-sharpening girl could have been put to better use in an action movie?

Overall, my disappointment over what could have been made out of this prevails over the fact that it's a solid action movie.

Roja (1992)

First part of Mani Ratnam's political trilogy

[8/10 · 12 April 2004]

This is the first movie of what was to become director Mani Ratnam's "political trilogy" ("Bombay" and "Dil Se" being the movies to follow). While not quite as accomplished as the later movies, he develops a very simple story of a young married couple, the subsequent kidnapping of the husband and the wife's attempts to persuade the authorities to help free him into a well-rounded movie that works on almost all levels that it encompasses:

The love relationship between the two main characters is credible and well-handled; the struggle of the individual citizen vs. government authorities and individual desires vs. the larger scale of politics is dealt with intensely (the scene where the Colonel tells Roja that "everyone is happy" is simply chilling), and even the interplay of the kidnapped and the terrorists works out really well, even if it seems sometimes that Rishi Kumar was lucky ending up with these rather than more ruthless people.

The only problem that I have with this movie are a small handful of scenes in which Indian patriotism is showcased in what I felt was a rather blunt manner (but then, coming from a different country, I may lack some essential cultural background to understand it).

Apart from this one quibble I think it's a good movie that you should really see, especially I've you've seen Mani Ratnam's other films. Acting is solid, especially from Pankaj Kapoor as the terrorist leader, but also from Arvind Swamy as Rishi (except perhaps when he goes into patriotic overdrive). Also on-screen chemistry between Arvind and Madhoo is fabulous. The music is an early, often charming ("Dil hai chhota sa") score by A. R. Rahman.

Watch it.

Pyaar To Hona Hi Tha (1998)

Nice remake of "French Kiss"

[7/10 · 26 February 2004]

Pyaar to hona hi tha ("Love had to happen") is a well-done, very close remake of Lawrence Kasdan's French Kiss for an Indian audience. As such, it's an enjoyable, lightweight, fluffy, if inconsequential comedy which, despite its sometimes garish use of colours certainly has its moments and is at times even better than the original.

Ajay Devgan and Kajol share much better chemistry than Kevin Kline and Meg Ryan (they got married pretty soon afterwards). Devgan's thug is a lot slicker than Kline's, and his moustache is much superior. Meg Ryan played her character in a cute, whiny, bratty way, whereas Kajol is equally cute in a more wacky, goofy way. Jean Reno was pretty good as the police officer, but Om Puri is even better.

Whereas casting and character interplay are actually better in this remake, technically the American original is, of course, much superior. Some of the continuity problems and location inconsistencies are downright annoying. I also don't find the slapstick scenes (like the airplane scene) too funny, but thankfully there's only a few of them.

Overall a very enjoyable movie, especially if compared to the original.

3 Deewarein (2003)

Not sure

[8/10 · 21 February 2004]

I think I have to watch this movie again, because it's either pretty good or pretty average.

It all depends on whether in the end, when we see the three murders again, this is what actually happened (which would be awfully contrived and pretty bad) or whether it's another one of Ishaan's stories, made up to save himself and the other two prisoners (which would be a very interesting twist). There are clues to either interpretation, but it's not really clear which of the two is happening.

Up to the end it's a very good, taut movie with good acting and a perfect script; it's just that the ending, which I'm not sure about, either destroys it or makes it even better.

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)

Totally over-the-top splatter comic

[7/10 · 24 January 2004]

Can't really say if this movie is good or not, because half of it is missing. What we get is a splatter samurai movie with lots of well-choreographed sword fighting scenes, lots of dismembered bodies, lots of blood, lots of very dry, gutwrenching humour and the coolest Uma Thurman ever.

What we don't get is a decent movie, because some greedy guy somewhere decided to split the movie in two parts so that they could make more money with it. Which is especially annoying as they could well have edited 10-15 minutes out of this part, to make a 3 1/2-hour movie total - Indian filmmakers do that all the time.

Anyway, I'll give the film a proper rating after I've seen part 2, which will probably be in a few months. As it stands at the moment, a disconected fragment of a splatter comic that's been turned into a film, it's only Uma Thurman that warrants a 7/10.

Sholay (1975)

Brilliant

[10/10 · 5 January 2004]

If you liked "Once upon a time in the west", "The magnificent seven" and "A fistful of dollars", you will love "Sholay". It takes all the good ingredients of a western, spices it with a lot of Indian ingredients and lets it simmer until you get one of the finest "curry" westerns imaginable. Though obviously very much inspired by the "spaghetti" westerns of the late 1960s/early 1970s, this easily surpasses most of the films it's modeled after. A masterpiece.

Dogville (2003)

Von Trier goes Brecht

[9/10 · 26 November 2003]

(This makes more sense if you read it after having seen the movie.)

From the alienation effect created by the bare theatrical setting and the odd voice-over to the didactic message, this movie has Bertolt Brecht written all over it, and just as Brecht does, Von Trier explores human nature and human exploitation from an odd analytic distance: his Dogville is no more in the USA than Brecht's Good Person of Szechwan is set in the real China or Saint Joan of the Stockyards in the real Chicago. Rather they are all just examples of universal characters that can be found in any place.

Von Trier's moral inquiry goes one step further than Brecht (whose protagonists typically fail), when he provides a cathartic ending that somehow feels good even though it is totally inappropriate in moral terms; immediately before, two characters discuss the concept of arrogance, in which they apply it to totally opposite characters, and yet both are right. And even if it's true that the villagers' best was not enough, who is Grace to decide this? Once she is in a position of power, is she not just as bad as the villagers - or perhaps even worse?

What is the story about anyway? Is it about a poor fugitive who is taken advantage of in the worst possible ways and who then takes bitter revenge, or is is about a group of poor villagers who are taking revenge on a rich girl, only to be beaten back into submission?

And the pictures of poor American farmers from the 1930s juxtaposed with American homeless of the 1990s during the end credits - are they meant as criticism or excuse?

If anything, the point that the philosopher character, who claims he can see through everybody, is the most clueless person in the film, should give you a clue that there are no answers in this movie, only questions, and as soon as you think you have an answer, you notice that you have been deceived.

So who is arrogant - Grace, the gangster boss, the villagers, or you, the viewer?

Baazigar (1993)

Solid, if somewhat brutal revenge thriller

[7/10 · 23 September 2003]

I'm afraid I have to keep this pretty short, or I'll give away too much of the plot, and in this case any spoiler would really spoil what is a solid revenge thriller. Good performance from Shahrukh Khan in a double role; and he meets a perfect match in Dalip Tahil, as both involve the audience in a guessing game of who's the good guy and who's the bad guy, as the mystery and back story slowly unfold; this never gets boring. However, there are a number of fairly brutal scenes. The murders take place almost Tarantino-style, and the final confrontation between one of the two Shahrukh characters and Dalip Tahil's character shows a lot more blood and more gory detail than necessary.

Kajol is excellent, as she is most of the time, and Johny Lever is slightly less annoying than usual. Otherwise it is a pretty average Bollywood production with the feel of a cheap 1980s Hollywood B-movie, especially in terms of costumes and production design. Anu Malik's score is not bad, but sounds familiar if you know his other stuff. Solid, not exceptional, but well worth watching, and certainly a must for Shahrukh and Kajol fans.

Mohabbatein (2000)

Weak script, but good acting from SRK for once

[5/10 · 18 September 2003]

"Mohabbatein" is a Bollywood version of "Dead Poets' Society" about an elite school with strict rules and a young teacher set out to teach a sense of love and individuality to his students. However, depite the lush sets and the obvious amount of effort taken to turn this into a hit movie, it is mostly a disappointment.

The script is simply weak; the love stories aren't particularly convincing and look like rehashed versions of things we have seen a thousand times before; the college concept is not really credible because the focus on Narayan Shankar and Raj Aryan is such that we could almost believe they are the only two teachers there; Shankar's change of heart seems unmotivated and out of character; and the no less than five love stories seem utterly unfocused.

Add to that an abysmal score by Jatin-Lalit, who seem to have simply recycled music from other movies for this one.

The plus point are strong performances from Amitabh Bachchan and, surprisingly, Shahrukh Khan, who really shines in this movie. The interplay between the two is particularly good (and much better than in KKKG, I might add), but sadly, that's not enough to make a movie.

Dil Se.. (1998)

Compelling film about obsessions

[9/10 · 18 September 2003]

Dil Se is one of the films that would never get made outside India, I guess; especially in the western world, viewers would be totally puzzled by the lack of logic that governs most of the film. And yet, it's a totally compelling movie, perhaps precisely because we do not understand what strange kind of obsession is driving Shahrukh Khan's character to follow the mysterious Meghna (Manisha Koirala), despite the fact that she is obviously not interested in him, and despite the fact that he is putting himself in real danger. On the other hand, Meghna herself seems to be driven forward by some kind of obsession, one that also remains a mystery to the viewer until about half way through the film.

The mixture of obsessive love story and political thriller is not as absurd as it may seem at first, for it is the same force that is driving the main characters, and it is driving them towards the same conclusion.

Performances from both Shahrukh Khan and Manisha Koirala are solid, but both have had better moments in other movies.

However, the A. R. Rahman score is among the most impressive he has written so far, and Santosh Sivan's cinematography, especially during the musical numbers, is close to genius; the dark mood that permeates images, music and acting from the first scene makes you wonder from very early onwards as to what end this movie may be brought. It's probably not what you expected, but it makes perfect sense. You won't be disappointed.

Bollywood/Hollywood (2002)

Hilarious Bollywood parody

[1 September 2003]

One caveat: if you have never seen a Bollywood movie, you probably won't find this very funny. The point is, director Deepa Mehta has taken just about every Bollywood cliché, exaggerated it, swirled it around and mixed it with a Hollywood love story and created a perfectly funny Bollywood parody that had me in giggles from the weepy deathbed scene at the beginning through most of the movie.

Depth? Don't expect any. This is about as lightweight (and sometimes silly) as comedy can get, with the usual suspension of disbelief necessary for Bollywood movies.

The title doesn't really have anything to do with the plot; it's more of a programmatic statement, as Mehta tries to intertwine Bollywood and Hollywood elements into a musical romantic comedy.

The Bollywood bits are the more successful, as Mehta sems to have the necessary expertise to exploit them for parody and quirky humour; sadly, the weakest point of the movie is when the Bollywood/Hollywood formula shifts too much towards the Hollywood side and tries to incorporate too much of the typical Hollywood 'romantic comedy' storyline. All of a sudden the script seems to take itself too seriously, and the whole thing, which had been very fresh and entertaining up until then, suddenly tastes very stale, and we get the umpteenth reprise of "love in danger through misunderstanding", and whereas the Bollywood melodrama had been masterly turned into brilliant parody, the Hollywood drama just stands as it is and is presented at face value, which is a major disappointment.

However, the 75 minutes of hilarious Bollywood parody will more than compensate for those 15 minutes of Hollywood lameness. So will the excellent Bollywood-inspired (and Hollywood-compatible) music. Just don't expect depth.

Ishq (1997)

Quirky all-in-one package

[28 August 2003]

I guess that most Bollywood movies will strike western viewers as somewhat quirky in terms of storytelling structure and acting, but compared to other Bollywood movies I've seen so far, this one seems to be an exceptionally quirky one.

The story is fairly simple: rich boy (Ajay Devgan) and poor boy (Aamir Khan) are best friends, rich girl (Juhi Chawla) and poor girl (Kajol) are best friends. Rich boy falls in love with poor girl, poor boy falls in love with rich girl, and the two rich fathers will do anything to destroy the two budding relationships.

That's basically it. There is no real plot; instead there's a sequence of scenes where the two fathers devise a dirty scheme, which is promptly thwarted by the young lovers. On to another scheme, which again is not successful. The next dirty plan follows, which... you get the idea.

Still, the evil schemes become increasingly more devious, and their consequences more severe as the film progresses; along with this progression, the film makes its way through all genres that you can imagine: it starts out as a fairly silly slapstick comedy, turns into romantic comedy, then into romance, then into thriller and finally into a tragic melodrama. At one point, there's even a horror scene thrown in for good measure.

Plot holes and illogical character behaviour aplenty, but that's what you expect of any Bollywood movie, more or less.

As for the acting, well, don't expect stellar performances. Most of the supporting cast are somewhat annoying, especially in the slapstick scenes, although Johny Lever for once plays a fairly non-silly, likeable character.

The lead actors give solid performances, particularly Kajol and Aamir Khan, who manage to be funny (without overdoing it) in the comedy bits and believably serious/emotional (without overdoing it) in the tragic parts. Ajay Devgan has great onscreen chemistry with Kajol (they aren't married for no reason, it seems), but overall his character has a serious depth deficit and is just too gullible. Juhi Chawla is very pretty and good fun to watch, and it is her very energetic performance that drives the movie along much of the time. However, she is mostly really more of a pleasant diversion than a full-fledged character.

The music by Anu Malik has no real highlights and, like the film, probes its way around several genres. My personal favourite is 'Dekho Dekho Jaanam', a compellingly cute, slightly silly Kajol/Devgan love duet (sung by Udit Narayan and Alka Yagnik). 'Ishq Hua Kaise Hua', the corresponding Chawla/Khan duet (Udit Narayan/Vibha Sharma) is more romantic, much less successful, but comes at least complete with lots of Swiss Alps. The disco-inspired songs are, alas, not very inspired.

Overall, this is a 3-hour tour de force, an all-in-one package of all emotions and film genres that you can imagine; not really the best of Bollywood, but still fairly enjoyable. Not sure whether it's worth the trip to the cinema, but rent the DVD and watch this if you are in a quirky mood or if you have friends over for an Indian dinner.

Godmother (1999)

A stunning feminist Bollywood extravaganza

[9/10 · 5 March 2003]

Putting aside Bollywood's somewhat unusual narrative pace and plot structure, this is an excellent movie. Shabana Azmi is simply stunning in her portrayal of Rambhi, a simple farmer's wife who moves to the city with her husband and, when her husband is killed, becomes a veritable mafia Godmother, killing every opponent without so much as a blink and fighting the corrupt political system only to increase her own political power.

At the same time, it is a movie with a strong feminist twist, as it is the belittled widow who becomes the most ruthless and influential politician in the district; and in the end, when she realizes that she has made some serious mistakes, it is also a very progressive plea for tolerance and understanding -- "what unites a community also tears it apart".

There are a few plot holes here and there and you have to forgive this film a few Bollywood idiosynchrasies, but it's still an easy 9/10.

Murder by Numbers (2002)

Solid thriller

[7/10 · 29 June 2002]

This is a solid enough thriller, certainly better than average, but not exactly a masterpiece. Not sure what went wrong though: there was plenty of suspense, good acting, but still something didn't feel right, and there were a couple of deja-vus that felt a bit unsatisfying.

On problem may have been that the script didn't know whether to focus on the two murderers or on Detective Mayweather's personal problems, and chose to focus on neither... plus many of the scenes with the two guys felt like I had seen them many times before on TV (e.g. how many times have we seen the bad guy with the rich, influential father?). But even those cliches weren't fully explored... it amounts to a script that scratches a bit on the surface, but doesn't ever go deeper. I guess that's where my disappointment came from.

Solid acting from Bullock, who managed to play this introspective and yet tough role very well; it was good to see her cast against her usual character and faring so well. Gosling and Pitt weren't bad either, but still felt a lot like stock characters. Ben Chaplin was cute, but little more than that, R. D. Call never progressed beyond the police boss stereotype, and Agnes Bruckner was just atrocious is all her stiffness.

The whole thing was directed solidly, but apparently without too much enthusiasm by Barbet Schroeder. With some more enthusiasm and a better, more focused script that relied less on deja-vus and stereotypes this could have been a great movie. As it is, it's good, but nothing to get too excited about.

Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)

Fast-paced sci-fi action flick with some serious shortcomings

[3/10 · 20 May 2002]

*** Plenty of SPOILERS ahead. Beware. ***

Duh. This movie left me mostly unsatisfied, but then so have most Star Wars movies with the exception of "The Empire Strikes Back".

The problem with "Phantom Menace" was that it was mostly about a pod race in the desert. I know it was supposed to be about other things, but the way it was written, cut and directed, all that other stuff sort of diminished.

Now "Clones" was about... uhhh, what, actually? There's some kind of a story there, but it branched out into various directions and sub-plots, trying to keep viewers occupied with action scenes that didn't do anything to further the main story. The main story, by the way, was Anakin being drawn to the Dark Side and Senator Palpatine's tricks and intrigues to become Emperor. But I doubt that anybody noticed, as this rarely featured in the film at all. Instead we got action scenes, a few cheesy love scenes, and some more action scenes. Did we really feel Anakin's falling to the Dark Side or did we just see a pouty teenager? Did anybody realise that Count Dooku's droids were part of a plot engineered by Chancellor Palpatine and had nothing to do with the Trade Federation? And why the attempt to kill Senator Amidala? Oh, if you look very, very closely, you might find a few seconds donated to brief explanations of all of the above, but this could have been so much more interesting.

I like "Empire" so much because it is perhaps the most focused film of the series, always trying to further the main storyline. Plus, it's dark, grim and depressing, and it thrives from the psychological impact of Darth Vader's evil presence. With all the evil present, "Clones" could have been similar, but wasn't. There were a couple of good beginnings, but things weren't properly developed, as the plot had to haste from action scene to action scene. And the bad guys were mere cardboard characters, even Christopher Lee failed miserably as Count Dooku (I like to call him "Count Dookula" ;-)). And why is the face of Darth Sidious still not seen? Isn't it obvious that it is none other than Chancellor Palpatine? Why not spend more time on him? I kept wondering whether there was no plot, or whether it just wasn't going anywhere.

At least the computer-generated landscapes didn't look as pathetically fake as they did in "Phantom Menace", although I thought having Padme and Anakin picnic in front of five Niagara falls was a bit over the top.

As far as the actors are concerned, I must say that despite the fact that Ewan McGregor is certainly a good actor, the absence of a true character actor (such as Liam Neeson in Episode I) was strongly felt. Also the fact that most of the time the actors had to interact with thin air (a.k.a. computer-generated characters) and didn't stand on a set, but in a blue room, shows.

And a director should always beware and not try to enforce a love scene between two characters played by actors without any chemistry between them. The love scenes in this movie were about the cheesiest I ever saw in a film. As it happens, in the movie theater where I saw this film, the audience laughed during most of the "romantic" scenes. Granted, Natalie Portman looks quite hot in the one scene with the open fire in the background when she talks about "living a lie", but it really felt to me like she was "acting a lie".

Hayden Christensen... oh my. This guy is cute, but he still has a lot to learn about acting. Whenever he tries to put on a "serious" face, he is about as successful as Bruce Boxleitner in "Babylon 5" - that is to say NOT.

As I said, Ewan McGregor wasn't bad, but he is no match for an Alec Guinness or a Liam Neeson. Plus, his beard irritated me, because it looked different in just about every scene. He was helping to construct a good back story for Obi Wan Kenobi, a character I have always liked, and he brought that character to life with all his strengths and weaknesses - definitely well done.

Unfortunatly, there was some humour, which was, well, tedious. Not only did C3PO deliver probably the worst pun on film ever, most of the one-liners were just incredibly lame. I had more fun with Jar Jar Binks in Episode I.

This gets me to the bottom line:

"Attack of the Clones" is a solid science fiction movie with lots of fast-paced, well choreographed action scenes that really kick butt (especially the one with Yoda vs. Count Dracula, which had the audience in the movie theater in cheers). Apart from the grand action, however, a potentially very good story was unfortunately totally ruined by mediocre writing, mediocre acting and abominably bad directing, which did not care to put emphasis on the scenes that really mattered. The story behind the entire Star Wars series is a fascinating mixture of mythology, human emotion, and political intrigue. What we got here was neither of the three, instead we got tapestries of visual effects and action scenes that did nothing to further that story. Overall, it's a movie that just wasn't focused on anything, and were it not part of the famous Star Wars series, it definitely would not get the attention it is having.

I so hope that Episode III will be better. But I fear that the huge potential that's lying in store there will just as well be laid to waste.

Overall, of the five Star Wars movies I'd rate "Clones" second or third, definitely behind "Empire", and probably behind "Star Wars". Funny enough, the more I learn about the back story of Anakin, the more I dislike "Return of the Jedi" - it brings the whole thing, which is getting more and more complex, to such an unsatisfactory, and terribly cheesy ending. But that's a different movie altogether.

M*A*S*H: Goodbye, Farewell and Amen (1983) Season 11, Episode 16

Wrapping it up nicely

[8/10 · 1 May 2002]

(some very minor spoilers)

GF&A is the adequate ending for a TV series than ran 11 years, and it is intersting to see how far the show and the characters have progressed over the years. This final episode is a far cry from the early wacky episodes, it is much more thoughtful and pensive; gone are Hawkeye's jokes as he tries to come to terms with the ways the war has changed his life -- I guess in the early episodes no-one could have predicted the way he would say goodbye to Hot Lips Houlihan at the end of this episode; now all of a sudden what he does feels totally right.

It's a sad episode, sad mostly because it's all about saying goodbye: it's what the characters have to say to each other after 3 years of war, and it's what we have to say to the actors after 11 years of a great TV series. So here it goes, picking up some loose threads and wrapping the series up nicely. A bit sentimental perhaps, but what else could it be?

Therefore, it's no small surprise that in contrast to the TV series the truly great moments are not funny, but rather deeply touching: the experience that triggered Hawkeye's crisis; Charles' reaction to hearing the musicians play for the first time; Charles' reaction after learning what happened to the musicians; Hawkeye saying goodbye to Hot Lips; B.J. and Hawkeye saying goodbye to Colonel Potter.

A great ending to a great series.

Things You Can Tell Just by Looking at Her (2000)

I liked it.

[9/10 · 20 April 2002]

This is a very slow-paced film, with very little going on. I have no problem with that, but I can see why the average moviegoer would probably hate it.

Excellent work from all the actors involved, and a script that refrains from the usual tearjerking or moralizing and simply presents four very simple stories.

9/10.

Noises Off... (1992)

Hilarious. Almost laughed my head off.

[10/10 · 9 January 2002]

Michael Frayn's "Noises Off" is the farce to end all farces, a hilariously funny play that had me fall off my cinema seat repeatedly because I just couldn't stop laughing.

In it, a group of moderately talented actors attempts to perform a bedroom farce called "Nothing On", but their own incompentence and personal disagreements get in the way to result in perfect, bizarre chaos like nothing ever seen before on screen.

This is a long-time favourite on the stage, and Peter Bogdanovich has masterly brought it to the screen. It's all about timing, you see (oh yes, and "doors and sardines", as one of the characters puts it), and the timing is just perfect, which is quite an achievement, given the movie's extraordinarily fast pace.

I give this movie 10 points, not for depth (which there isn't), but for 90 minutes of perfect, witty, fast-paced and extremely funny comedy.

The Man Who Wasn't There (2001)

A movie that doesn't know what it wants

[6/10 · 23 December 2001]

(contains minor spoilers)

The Coen brothers' new movie is very uneven, and in its unevenness it is ultimately disappointing. The problem as I see it is entirely with the script; the actors are all great (Billy Bob Thornton is excellent as Ed Crane) and do their best to deal with a script that doesn't know where it's going.

The Man Who Wasn't There starts as a film noir; the problem is that none of the characters is sufficiently noir. Ed Crane may be bad enough to blackmail somebody, but he is not really a murderer, and he's a far cry from the ultimate good guy turned bad, Fred MacMurray's Walter Neff from Double Indemnity. Not happy with the homage to the film noir, the script was spiced up with an obvious nod to Stanley Kubrick's Lolita, which I felt was totally out of place and simply added 30 superfluous minutes to a movie that was at any rate too long.

I call this a major disappointment. 6/10, and that's only for the actors and the cinematography. The script may be among the Coens' weakest so far.

The Curse of the Jade Scorpion (2001)

Thoroughly enjoyable

[8/10 · 8 December 2001]

I've seen better films by Mr Allen, but there are few which come across as enjoyable. This is obviously a movie intended as an homage to 1940s detective movies, with some humor thrown in for good measure. I guess it's not something to be thought about a lot, so just sit back and enjoy it. It's well worth your while.

Coogan's Bluff (1968)

Urban wild west movie; a male fantasy of the 1960s

[7/10 · 2 December 2001]

(minor spoilers)

While Coogan's Bluff is a solid action movie that won't leave you bored for a second, it's amazing how dated and aged this 1968 movie feels some 30 years later. Coogan seems more like a character from some Western movie in the way he deals with criminals or women. Shot around the time when Women's Lib took off, it surprising how full of male chauvinist coolness it is (remember: treat a woman real bad and she'll come to the top of a skyscraper and wave goodbye as you leave - probably because she's so happy she won't ever see you again).

Similarly, in all its simple straightforwardness the plot is also like taken from a Western - no plot twists or anything, Coogan just gets the right clues at the right time to lead him to the criminal, and help is there just when he needs it.

Still, all this simplicity *is* kind of stunning and refreshing given how twisted and similarly unrealistic today's action movies are. So if you can shake off how dated this film is and simply watch it as a prime example of 1960s male coolness, go for this one.